Tuesday, December 6, 2011

From Tragedy To Action: The National Release of "Jana’s Story". Jana Mackey Kansas University Student & NOW Lobbyist Who Was Brutally Murdered In An Act of Domestic Violence....

The video "Jana's Story" is now available. Please see the link below. http://www.JanasStory.org/
This powerful video is about the dramatic impact of domestic violence. Most importantly, however, this short film is about hope, inspiration, and encouragement for others to take action. Today, Jana's light shines brighter than ever. VIEW IT. SHARE IT. and LIVE IT by taking action and making a difference.

 

National Release of "Jana’s Story" Video Set For December 6th

On December 6, 2011, Jana's Campaign will release its long anticipated video "Jana’s Story".  This powerful video brings to light the dramatic impact of domestic violence.  The story of Jana’s life and death are illustrated in the hopes of encouraging others to take action.  See the video at www.JanasStory.org. VIEW IT. Witness the powerful story of Jana’s life.  SHARE IT.  Help us tell Jana’s story and spread the word.  LIVE IT.  Take action and make a difference.
The timing of this video release has been scheduled to coincide with The 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence.  This campaign begins on November 25, the International Day Against Violence Against Women, and ends on December 10, International Human Rights Day. 
These dates symbolically link violence against women and human rights, and emphasize that such violence is a human rights violation.  Since 1991, this annual campaign has mobilized more than 3,700 organizations in 164 countries to raise awareness about the multiple forms of violence women face.  The 16 Days of Activism Against Gender Violence is hosted and sponsored by the Center for Women's Global Leadership at Rutgers University.
Jana’s Campaign would like to thank all those who have made this video production possible. 
Jana's Campaign

Wednesday, November 30, 2011

‘Monsters’ Short Animated Video That Depicts Devastating View of Domestic Violence From a Child’s Perspective Launched by Verizon and National Domestic Violence Hotline

Verizon and National Domestic Violence Hotline Launch ‘Monsters,’ a Short Animated Video That Depicts Devastating View of Domestic Violence From a Child’s Perspective

Monsters 1Monsters 2

 

Video (below) Aimed at Encouraging Public to Support Domestic Violence Prevention Efforts and to Call for Help

 

BASKING RIDGE, N.J. —“Monsters,” a provocative new video, portrays the alarming impact of domestic violence on families and children, as seen through the eyes of a young girl. Produced and funded by theVerizon Foundation and supported by the National Domestic Violence Hotline, the video encourages the public to get involved in domestic violence prevention and education efforts, and also emphasizes that help for victims and their families is just a phone call away: 1-800-799-SAFE (1-800-799-7233).

Verizon Wireless customers can quickly reach the National Domestic Violence Hotline by dialing #HOPE. The hotline offers confidential help 24/7. To help support the hotline’s efforts, Verizon Wireless, through HopeLine has donated $75,000. HopeLine collects no-longer-used wireless phones and recycles or refurbishes them to support domestic violence victims and survivors.

The video, two minutes and 34 seconds long, graphically describes how domestic violence affects children. The child’s voice states:

“A child who lives with domestic violence lives in darkness. …She struggles to separate her nightmares from reality because there’s very little difference. The child who lives with domestic violence isn’t afraid of the dark. She’s afraid of her dad because the monster doesn’t live in her closet – it’s just down the hall.”

Studies suggest that between 3.3 million and 10 million children witness some form of domestic violence each year. And according to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, witnessing violence between parents or caregivers is the strongest risk factor for transmitting violent behavior from one generation to the next. The video notes that girls who witness abuse are more likely to be abused later in life, and boys are twice as likely to abuse their own partners – “because that’s the world they know.”

Rose Kirk, president of the Verizon Foundation, said:

“To end this devastating cycle of violence, we must motivate silent bystanders to take action. People need to understand that when they look the other way, they condone this deplorable behavior. Verizon is committed to preventing domestic violence by educating our employees, customers and the public about the importance of stepping in to help someone in need. We believe that this provocative video will help us accomplish this life-saving goal.”

According to some studies, less that 1 percent of domestic violence cases are reported to the police.

Dyanne Purcell, CEO of the National Domestic Violence Hotline, said: “It takes an incredible amount of courage to come forward and ask for help. The more established domestic violence is in our national dialogue, the more likely victims will be able to seek help and make a lasting change.”

The video concludes with the child narrator making a poignant plea for the public to help:

“Maybe you don’t wake up every day shaking, or jump every time the phone rings. But maybe you should look a little harder. Maybe it’s a friend, a co-worker, or your neighbor. …Your help could make all the difference. We need everyone to bring domestic violence into the light.”

Kirk said, “Please share the link to the ‘Monsters’ video with your family, friends, neighbors and colleagues. It’s a simple action that may have a huge impact.”

The “Monsters” video can be viewed athttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=367JvtoTm34.

About the National Domestic Violence Hotline

The National Domestic Violence Hotline was established in 1996 as a component of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) passed by Congress and is supported by funding from the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services. The Hotline is a nonprofit organization providing crisis intervention, information and referral to victims of domestic violence, perpetrators, friends and families. The Hotline answers a variety of calls and is a resource for domestic violence advocates, government officials, law enforcement agencies and the general public. http://www.thehotline.org

About Verizon Foundation

The Verizon Foundation, the philanthropic arm of Verizon, uses its technology, financial resources and partnerships to address critical social issues, with a focus on education and domestic violence prevention. Verizon has invested more than $28 million in domestic violence prevention. For more information on the foundation, visit www.verizonfoundation.org.

About Verizon

Verizon Communications Inc. (NYSE, NASDAQ:VZ), headquartered in New York, is a global leader in delivering broadband and other wireless and wireline communications services to consumer, business, government and wholesale customers. Verizon Wireless operates America’s most reliable wireless network, with more than 106 million total connections nationwide. Verizon also provides converged communications, information and entertainment services over America’s most advanced fiber-optic network, and delivers integrated business solutions to customers in more than 150 countries, including all of the Fortune 500. A Dow 30 company, Verizon employs a diverse workforce of nearly 196,000 and last year generated consolidated revenues of $106.6 billion. For more information, visit www.verizon.com.

VERIZON’S ONLINE NEWS CENTER: Verizon news releases, executive speeches and biographies, media contacts, high-quality video and images, and other information are available at Verizon’s News Center on the World Wide Web atwww.verizon.com/news. To receive news releases by e-mail, visit the News Center and register for customized automatic delivery of Verizon news releases.

Friday, November 25, 2011

U. S. Department of Justice v. Custody Court System

(Battered Mothers, Abused Children are Being Further Battered and Abused by the US Courts failure to let Domestic Violence Mothers Leave With Their Children. Many Ask, “Why Doesn’t She Just Leave?” When it comes to Domestic Violence, besides all the other very unsafe reasons those with children will loose their children to the very animal who hurt them and their children. Many mothers,(most) have never seen their children again after the Courts gave their child[ren] to the Abusers. Most Children, if the survive, end up just like they were taught raised and reinforced by the Courts, as abusers themselves for boys and victims for girls. That is not county all the other trauma related issues. This has passed beyond just injustice but has stepped full fledge in Human Rights Violations. It truly is like the holocaust, the destruction of women and their children by the USA, Sanctioned Genocide Against Mothers and their Children. Right in Plain View, See: Mothers Day Law Suit filed Against the U.S. at the Inter American Commission Human Rights. (still pending)

From Times –Up!! Attorney Barry Goldstein

clip_image002

photo courtesy of Family Court Crisis-Abusers Getting Custody!

By Barry Goldstein

Protective mothers have been complaining about mistreatment by the custody court system, but have routinely been dismissed as “disgruntled litigants.” As recently as the beginning of the Battered Mothers Custody Conferences in 2004, there was little professional support for protective mothers. The mothers’ complaints have now been confirmed and supported by the domestic violence community, many women’s organizations, numerous governmental agencies, many in the academic community and a substantial body of research such as contained in our book DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ABUSE and CHILD CUSTODY.


Last summer at the NCADV Conference, Dr. Daniel Saunders of the University of Michigan and some of his colleagues presented their findings from a major Department of Justice study that confirms the findings in our book and other research that the present custody court practices for domestic violence cases are deeply flawed. The publication of these findings has taken longer than expected as Dr. Saunders and the Justice Department seek to carefully present the information in a clear and accurate manner, but they should soon be available on the Department of Justice web site. Many of us who seek to reform the broken custody court system are excited about this study because it should be difficult for the courts to dismiss or ignore because of where it comes from. Significantly, the findings are incompatible with a continued belief that the present practices are working for the benefit of the children the courts are supposed to protect.


Custody Courts Frequently Disbelieve Valid Abuse Complaints


Custody courts have a particularly poor record in responding to domestic violence cases. The research demonstrates that court professionals reject a high percentage of valid complaints by protective mothers. This problem has been confirmed in many ways. It is confirmed based on the frequency of mistaken outcomes. Although battered mothers make deliberately false allegations only one or two percent of the time, in contested custody cases the alleged abuser wins custody or joint custody over seventy percent of the time. Subsequent events regularly confirm courts’ mistakes. This occurs when men found safe by the court professionals are later convicted or otherwise found to have to have committed domestic violence, sexual abuse, murder or other similar crimes.


The revelations of the Courageous Kids Network further demonstrate the frequency in which courts fail to recognize valid complaints of abuse. Courageous Kids are young adults who have aged out of their custody orders and decided to speak out about the harm caused by these orders. The context is important in understanding their stories. These are cases in which the court disbelieved the mothers’ abuse allegations and gave the fathers complete control. The children have been threatened, coerced and punished if they continue to complain about their father’s abuse or seek a relationship with their mother. In other words the fathers have had tremendous assistance in silencing the children. Accordingly the children now speaking out represent a small minority of those mistreated by fathers the court believed were safe. The descriptions by the Courageous Kids demonstrate the fathers deliberately sought to hurt the mother and children based upon their belief system that the mother had no right to leave them. The children have had little or no contact with their mothers often for many years so we know the mothers could not be influencing the children’s decision to speak out about the fathers’ abuse. These are all too common examples of cases in which the court professionals failed to believe valid allegations of abuse.


The research not only demonstrates the fact that the custody courts get a large majority of domestic violence cases wrong, but also that the standard practices used by court professionals are deeply flawed and make it difficult for judges to recognize legitimate complaints about domestic violence and child abuse.
Court professionals routinely discredit allegations of abuse based upon factors that are not probative. At the same time these professionals do not understand the importance of looking to the abusers’ patterns of controlling and coercive behavior in order to recognize domestic violence. The court professionals often make the mistake of considering each incident and each allegation separately. Genuine domestic violence experts understand the importance of context in recognizing domestic violence, but the mental health and other professionals relied on by the courts do not understand the importance of context and thus make it more difficult to recognize valid allegations of abuse.


One of the big obstacles to recognizing valid abuse complaints is the common use of mental health and other professionals without expertise in domestic violence. The main purpose of considering domestic violence in custody cases is to protect the safety of children. Nevertheless the evaluators relied on by custody courts rarely know how to conduct a safety assessment or what behaviors have been associated with higher lethality and other dangers. The evaluators do not understand domestic violence dynamics and often are unfamiliar with the effects of domestic violence on children or other information based upon the specialized body of scientific research that could be used to better understand domestic violence issues and recognize truthful allegations of abuse.


The new Department of Justice study helps explain why the evaluators and other professionals relied on by custody courts routinely fails to recognize domestic violence. The study found that most evaluators and other professionals relied on by the courts do not have adequate domestic violence training and those with inadequate training are more likely to believe in the myth that women frequently make false allegations of abuse to gain an advantage in litigation. The professionals who believe this myth, in turn are more likely to make recommendations that harm children. In other words judges have little chance to protect the children under their control as long as they rely on these unqualified professionals and tend to believe their deeply flawed analysis.


Judges often become defensive when protective mothers or their attorneys request that any evaluator or other court professional be required to have domestic violence expertise in order to be appointed. We have repeatedly seen judges refuse to listen to domestic violence experts offered on behalf of protective mothers. The courts often focus on the need for a mental health degree even though the academic training for most mental health professionals included no or virtually no domestic violence instruction and the law does not require advance degrees to qualify as an expert (a common example is a mechanic without a high school degree who can testify as an expert in automotive repair based on experience and training).


In recent years most court systems have encouraged and usually required some domestic violence training for court professionals. This is a good thing but has often been implemented in ways that undermine the purpose. Many of the trainings include substantial misinformation such as the belief most contested custody cases are “high conflict” when the research establishes a large majority are really domestic violence cases. Some of the trainings even include Parental Alienation Syndrome (sometimes by another name because of its deserved notoriety) even though it was recently again rejected for inclusion in the DSM-V because there is no scientific basis for it. Many of the trainings fail to include domestic violence advocates or other genuine experts in domestic violence.

 
We have also seen some really good programs used to train court professionals, but I have heard many trainers complain that some of the judges, evaluators and lawyers pay little attention to the valuable information presented. In one Queens County, New York case I cross-examined an experienced evaluator who went to a really excellent domestic violence training in order to qualify as a parent coordinator. They provided numerous excellent research studies that could have helped him recognize domestic violence and protect children. During my cross-examination it became clear he never read the research and was unfamiliar with the current scientific research he needed to understand the case. When I pressed him about the training he described it as “not a life changing experience.” This was a man who needed a life changing experience because he failed to recognize the obvious history of abuse by the father, demanded the mother cooperate with her abuser and when she continued to try to protect herself and her son, the unqualified evaluator recommended custody for the abusive father. The judge failed to discredit the evaluator based on his failure to read or consider the current scientific research provided at the training.


We need much more and better trainings for court professionals, but there is also the danger that attending trainings can give judges and other professionals a false sense of confidence in their understanding of domestic violence. The findings by Dr. Saunders and his colleagues that most court professionals have inadequate training in domestic violence confirms our concern that in most cases the professionals relied on by the court are not qualified to participate in a domestic violence case without the assistance of a genuine expert. Even if the judge has received good training the court is likely to be influenced by unqualified evaluators and other court professionals.


The failure to possess adequate training in domestic violence means that it will be difficult for these professionals to recognize and respond effectively to domestic violence, but the widespread belief in the myth that women frequently make false allegations of abuse is a bias that strongly undermines the cases of protective mothers. These mistakes result in frequent findings denying the mother’s abuse allegations which is exactly what the other research has found. If a professional believes the myth they will expect to see false allegations and without training in how to recognize domestic violence they have little chance to get these cases right and protect the children. Even worse, courts having found against the mothers because of the deeply flawed practices and biases are severely punishing mothers and children because the mothers continue to believe their true allegations despite the disbelief of the unqualified court professionals.


A few months ago, in this forum, I wrote an article about the extreme decisions we often see in domestic violence cases. These are decisions in which the alleged abuser receives custody and the mother who was the primary attachment figure is limited to supervised or no visitation. The primary attachment figure is the parent who provided most of the child care during the first couple of years of the child’s life. When children are separated from their primary attachment figure they are significantly more likely to suffer depression, low self-esteem and to commit suicide when older. It can never be right to separate children from their primary attachment figure unless she is unsafe such as a drug addict, someone who beats the kids or otherwise poses a danger. In most of these cases the father allowed or even demanded the mother provide child care until she decided to leave him. It should be obvious that her decision to leave a man she found to be abusive does not make the mother unsafe. Unqualified court professionals frequently limit the mother’s contact with her children based upon some version of alienation or pathologizing the mother based on psychological tests that were not made for the populations seen in custody cases. We know the diagnosis is not safety related because the mother functions fine in all other aspects of her life except interacting with her abuser and the court professionals supporting him. These are not safety issues so these extreme decisions can never be beneficial to the children.


The reliance on court professionals with inadequate training and belief in the myth takes place in the context of many other common mistakes discussed in earlier research. The courts cannot protect mothers and children in domestic violence cases if they cannot recognize domestic violence when it is present. The frequent decisions that harm children are confirmed by later findings and information, the extensive research court professionals routinely fail to consider and the new Department of Justice study and they provide multiple confirmations of the present inability of custody courts to recognize domestic violence and child abuse when it exists.


Misuse of Mothers’ Anger and Emotion


Let’s look at this issue from the mother’s perspective and in the context of her experience. These are domestic violence cases. The father usually has a long history of controlling and coercive behaviors and the mother has finally gained the courage and resources to leave her abuser in order to protect her children. She is fearful because of the many threats he made of what he would do if she left and knowledge that the most dangerous time for a woman is after she has left. She is angry at the way he has mistreated her and often the children. She may be worried about her ability to support and protect her children because her partner has been telling her how useless she is throughout their relationship.

Even if the father’s physical abuse ends when he no longer has access to the mother (which makes unqualified court professionals believe he is now safe), he continues his domestic violence through litigation abuse and often other ways. The abusers often use any contact provided by the court to seek reconciliation and/or to harass and attack her verbally or psychologically. Many women expect the courts to protect her children because the evidence is so overwhelming and instead find the court pressuring her to cooperate with her abuser and punishing her if she tries to protect her children from a man they have found to be hostile and dangerous. In other words she has good reason to be angry and emotional and in fact this would be a normal reaction to her experiences.

The research contained in our book and elsewhere supports this understanding and analysis. We discussed the common mistake of custody courts that treat the mother’s actions as a litigant as if they were an indication of her behavior as a parent. Over forty states and many judicial districts have created court sponsored gender bias committees. These committees have found widespread bias particularly against women litigants. One of the common examples of gender bias was blaming women for the actions of their abusers. One of the typical examples of this bias is when courts blame mothers for their anger and emotion caused by the father’s mistreatment of them and their children. In many cases the abusers deliberately harass or pressure them shortly before a court appearance is scheduled in order to obtain an emotional reaction the court is likely to misunderstand. Abusers tend to be extremely manipulative and so after their abuse that the judge does not see, come to court calm and cooperative. Court professionals are often fooled by this act.


The new Department of Justice study confirms what we said in our book and other similar research. Dr. Saunders found that court professionals frequently treat mothers’ anger and emotion as far more important than it actually is in terms of the well being of children. These professionals may be uncomfortable with the mothers’ emotions particularly if she criticizes their response to the father’s abuse. Clearly these are difficult and unpleasant issues to confront. The misinformation treating contested custody as if it were “high conflict” when it is actually domestic violence contributes to the misunderstanding of the mothers’ anger and emotion. The professionals are focused on forcing the parties to cooperate even though this is not the best approach for children. When the parties have difficulty cooperating and certainly in domestic violence cases, parallel parenting is a more effective approach for children. The problem, as demonstrated by the Saunders’ study is that these professionals are focused on their beliefs and preferences rather than research about what works best for children. The custody courts did not get into the practice of looking to current scientific research and particularly the specialized body of research about domestic violence because there was no such research when the initial court practices were developed. We now have substantial research that would help inform court decisions and avoid the frequent mistakes but court professionals rarely look to this research to help them make better decisions. This is why we rarely see custody courts weigh the benefits and harms to children of a proposed resolution. The Department of Justice study establishes that these flawed practices lead to decisions that hurt children.


Cottage Industry Supporting Abusive Fathers


We often hear complaints about corruption in the custody court system. This belief is supported by the many cases in which courts make findings that are far removed from a fair evaluation of the evidence and decisions that seem to be disconnected from the well being of the children involved. There are cases of outright corruption such as the Garson case in Brooklyn, New York, but more often, I believe courts create the appearance of corruption because of bias, ignorance and deeply flawed practices. One of my concerns with complaints about corruption is that it makes it harder for judges in the broken system to hear the complaints and create the reforms that are needed. An important contributing factor to the widespread belief in corruption is the cottage industry that has been created to support abusive fathers.


Most contested custody cases involve abusive fathers seeking custody as a tactic to pressure their victims to return or punish them for leaving. Domestic violence is all about control so these abusive fathers usually have controlled the family finances and have these resources to support their custody litigation. Some lawyers and mental health professionals have figured out that they can make a large income by supporting practices and approaches that support abusers. We often see them advertise as supporting “fathers’ rights.” In many cases we see fathers’ attorneys and GALs promoting the appointment of evaluators who support abusive fathers. It is particularly frustrating when judges refer to these professionals who regularly support abusers as “neutral professionals.”


Protective mothers often have no chance when these biased professionals are appointed regardless of how strong their cases may be. Many of the mothers have complained that the evaluators and GALs make misrepresentations to the court in order to justify findings in favor of the abusive fathers paying their fees. When such professionals lie to the court about the evidence or to justify fees they did not earn, the mothers are justified in complaints suggesting corruption.
Many of these biased professionals strongly support PAS despite a lack of scientific justification. Significantly, PAS is based upon the assumption that virtually every complaint by mothers about the father’s abuse is deliberately false. The Department of Justice study found a problem with inadequately trained professionals who believe the myth that women frequently make deliberately false allegations of abuse. The unqualified professionals supporting PAS are even worse assuming that virtually all such allegations are false. The courts have virtually no chance of making the right decision if they treat such biased professionals as having any credibility.
The Department of Justice study’s contribution to this issue is a finding that evaluators working for the court or the county made recommendations that worked better for children than those of evaluators in private practice. When Dr. Saunders described this finding at a workshop during the NCADV Conference I asked him if he thought the findings supported our concerns about the cottage industry that has developed to support abusive fathers. He agreed this was a good interpretation. Evaluators working for the court or county are not paid extra for each evaluation so they have no incentive to favor the wealthier parent.


Professionals often have fundamental conflicts of interest. Medical doctors who schedule tests or procedures will earn money from performing the services they recommend. Tests may be scheduled to shield the doctor from potential lawsuits rather than to benefit the patient. Lawyers who recommend going to trial, starting a lawsuit or making a motion will earn money when the client takes their advice. Similarly, mental health professionals benefit financially when patients accept recommendations for more services. The conflict of interest is largely unavoidable and the professionals are expected to have the integrity to act in their client’s best interests instead of their own. Unfortunately some of the evaluators and lawyers, particularly those supporting abusive fathers have not fulfilled this ethical obligation.


We have repeatedly seen problems in custody courts with mental health professionals and particularly ones sympathetic to abusive fathers making recommendations requiring protective mothers to use their unwanted and unneeded services. We see these biased professionals pathologizing mothers who have always taken good care of their children with diagnoses that are clearly wrong. This would include the frequent finding of rare conditions such as Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy, conditions like paranoia or delusional based on the mothers’ continued belief in the father’s abuse despite the failure of the court professionals to recognize his abuse and other emotional problems that magically seem to affect only her relationship with her abuser and the court. They seem oblivious to the fact that that she does fine in other parts of her life that under any unbiased circumstances would rule out the claimed diagnosis.


Some of these mistakes are clearly deliberate and qualify as corruption. Other cases may involve bias and ignorance and a lack of the needed qualifications as the Saunders’ study demonstrates. When the professionals who are part of the cottage industry engage in gender bias they usually do so without realizing it. Many actually believe in the theories and practices they use despite a lack of scientific basis. Some of this can be explained by confirmation bias where the professional focuses on information or accusations that support what the professional expects to find and ignores information that undermines their theories and assumptions. We see this kind of mistake frequently in domestic violence custody cases and the mental health professional is often unconscious that they are engaging in confirmation bias. In fact they are likely to become defensive and angry at the suggestion. The Department of Justice study demonstrates the harm of using professionals who are part of the cottage industry and the need for custody courts to screen court professionals to avoid relying on them. Even worse, courts often use these unqualified professionals to train other court professionals. This can only serve to spread misinformation which makes it harder for court officials to recognize the problems demonstrated by the Saunders’ study and other current scientific research.


Conclusion


The custody court system tends to look at each case and each issue or event in a case separately. This is based on a belief that just because a man slapped his wife on Monday does not mean he punched her on Friday. The court system uses stare decisis which means once a case or an issue has been decided the same parties cannot relitigate it. There are good reasons for these practices, but they work poorly in domestic violence cases because of the importance of context in understanding domestic violence. We often see cases where the court denies allegations of domestic violence and they may even have been right if there was insufficient evidence. Naturally the abuser continues his abusive behavior so more evidence becomes available, but many courts refuse to hear the new evidence or refuse to consider it in the context of the previous evidence because those issues were previously litigated. In doing this the court is denying itself the ability to recognize the pattern of the father’s abuse and protect the children. Domestic violence experts are confident that the custody court system is broken because we see the pattern of mistakes and harmful decisions, but the powers in the court system are offended at the criticism and cannot believe the problem because they refuse to look at the patterns.


The findings of the Department of Justice study, by itself, provides convincing documentation that the custody court system is getting a large majority of domestic violence custody cases wrong. It would be impossible for courts to get most cases right when most of the court professionals have inadequate domestic violence training, those with inadequate training tend to believe the myth that women frequently make false allegations, the courts are placing too much weight on mothers’ anger and emotion and the evaluators who earn additional money through appointment in custody cases are making decisions more harmful to children then those who do not have a financial incentive. This study was not made in a vacuum, but was produced in the context of a substantial and growing body of scientific research that establishes the custody courts are making bad decisions in contested custody cases that endanger children. The research also establishes that the standard practices used in the custody courts are deeply flawed and outdated.


I am hopeful that a study coming from the U. S. Department of Justice will be harder for the custody court system to ignore. They have a strong reputation and can only be considered neutral. Furthermore, the courts frequently seek grants and other funding from the Department of Justice. Protective mothers and their attorneys can cite this research and it should be harder for the courts to ignore. I can’t wait until it is published on the DOJ web site.

 

Barry Goldstein is a nationally recognized domestic violence expert, speaker, writer and consultant. He is the co-editor with Mo Therese Hannah of DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, ABUSE and CHILD CUSTODY. Barry can be reached by email at their web sitewww.Domesticviolenceabuseandchildcustody.com

Saturday, November 12, 2011

New tool gives abused women a voice in courtroom Advocates pushing for Evidentiary Abuse Affidavit

Click here for News Video WGN News

Example of How to do an Evidentiary Abuse Affidavit here.

By Marcella RaymondWGN News

One in four women is abused.  Nationwide eight women a day are murdered by an abuser.  But now there is a new tool that is helping women stay alive and giving them a voice in the process.

The evidentiary abuse affidavit was born out of Stacy Peterson’s disappearance.  It is a tool advocates say will wipe out hearsay since it comes from the woman herself.  First she details on paper abuse that, for some, has gone on for decades. The affidavit is witnessed by at least two people and notarized.  Then she reads it on tape.  

Susan Murphy-Milano has advocated for abused women for more than 20 years.  She created the Evidentiary Abuse Affidavit.

  Through Murphy-Milano, at least 1,000 women in the last year have made the evidentiary abuse affidavit.  All of them are still alive.

DuPage County State`s Attorney Robert Berlin says while the Evidentiary Abuse Affidavit statements would take away hearsay, now the 6th Amendment comes in to play where a defendant has the right to confront a witness against him.  Unless there`s more evidence that proves he made her disappear so she couldn`t testify.

The Evidentiary Abuse Affidavit will be available December 25th in app form at apple stores nationwide.

You can also get all the information in Susan Murphy-Milano's book “Time's Up.”  It's available on her websitewww.susanmurphymilano.com

Wednesday, October 26, 2011

Topeka, No money for Domestic Violence but Millions $ for Golf Course’s

The District Attorney only needed a pitiless 350K (that was cut) to be able to continue to ‘on a shoe string’ to prosecute Domestic Violence cases. So now these are the real priorities, now that the national media is dying down. It’s back on to the good ole boys business as usual and ‘how we can help ourselves, our personal agenda- now that we got rid of those annoying Domestic Violence Victims/Survivors and Advocates.. …..”

It’s Business as usual in the land of OZ- Where the wizard failed to give out any hearts, brains or courage to the City government.

Topeka City Counsel Members have approved a one million dollar heath care for its City employee’s this week. (just among some other non ‘public safety’ spending spree.)

But they can NOT afford to prosecute Domestic Violence cases? WTF? They ‘decriminalize domestic violence’ to save money for non ‘public safety’ issues. I mean Crime is at an all time high in Topeka, Ks. I Guess Topeka Citizens safety is JUST NOT important. The Topeka County Commissioners (the ones who Cut the District Attorney’s Budget to prosecute Domestic Violence Case’s) is to approve a golf course irrigation system with total debt service estimated at nearly $1.4 million.

But no one thinks that 350K for Domestic violence prosecutions is important. At least not in Topeka, KS.

What’s that matter with Topeka? There is not enough public outrage-

TOPEKA, KANSAS pure and simple does not give a shit about Victims of Domestic Violence. It is business as usual--- yes, profit business in Topeka. The only city in the Nation to Decriminalize Domestic Violence, and cut funding for Domestic Violence Prosecutions.

I say ladies, grab your guns and girdles- it’s time to take care of yourself and your children, and do an “Evidentiary Abuse Affidavit'” so when you are murdered at least he wont ‘get away with it’ as they say they will and usually do. This is just one of many from Domestic Violence expert and author Susan Murphy Milano’s

The book "Time's Up A Guide on How To Survive and Abusive and Stalking Relationship" 

is the prescription that every person must obtain before they announce they are leaving. Below is an example from Chapter 4, one of many unique tools provided in the book. It is available on Amazon.com, or you can purchase via e-book or on a CD. If you have questions, the email address is: timesupforjustice@gmail.com

Chapter 4 featuring the Evidentiary Abuse Affidavit contains information that is critical to help victims’ in documenting their experiences and creating a record to insure that instances of abuse are memorialized should they be needed for future use in the
legal system.

http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=14769756&server=vimeo.com&show_title=0&show_byline=0&show_portrait=0&color=00adef&fullscreen=1&autoplay=0&loop=0

Evidentiary Abuse Affidavit by Susan Murphy Milano from the Book "Time's Up" from Courage Network on Vimeo.

NO WAY OUT BUT ONE: a story of love and justice by Garland Waller and Barry Nolan

 new

http://www.nowayoutbutone.com/

Project Update #14: From Boston Magazine: ‘No Way Out But One’ to Unveil at MIT

Posted by Garland Waller and Barry Nolan Like

BY SARA EDWARDS

A compelling new documentary debuts in Boston this week that will open your eyes to a stunning injustice. No Way Out But One was co-written and directed by Emmy award winning television producer Garland Waller, currently a professor at Boston University. Waller, a friend and former colleague of mine at WBZ-TV, asked me to go to San Diego in August to critique the unfinished doc at a conference on domestic violence.

The film follows a case that gained international attention 10 years ago when a divorced mother made the FBI’s Most Wanted List for kidnapping her children from their father and escaping overseas.

Holly Collins, a battered wife living in Minnesota, divorced her husband but lost custody of her kids when the family court deemed she was so traumatized by the abuse that her parenting skills were questionable. The court also ignored evidence her ex-husband severely beat the children, even cracking his young son’s skull. In interviews with the children, now young adults, we hear about the emotional and physical cruelty they endured while living with their father. Collins took her kids and ran.

The film details their harrowing escape, how Collins eluded security at the airport pre-9/11, and how she and her children eventually became the first Americans ever granted asylum in the Netherlands.

But Collins is one of the lucky ones. She and her family (including her daughter, Jennifer, who’s director of the Courage Kids Network, which helps abused children) are now back in the U.S. and plan to attend the screening at 7 p.m. Thursday on MIT campus, room 6-120. Co-producers Waller and Barry Nolan will also be there. (Full disclosure: Nolan is a Boston Daily blogger.) Waller says she is thrilled the film was picked to lead off the new Chicks Make Flicks series, sponsored by Women in Film & Video/New England.

“I know it’s not a pleasant subject, talking about child abuse and having to acknowledge that the American family court system isn’t protecting abused children, but perhaps once people realize what is happening they can initiate change,” Holly Collins said.

It takes courage to put the spotlight on an issue that a flawed system would prefer be left in the shadows. No Way Out But One persuasively makes the case for much-needed change.

    Care to comment? View this update on Kickstarter →

     

    KICKSTARTER

    Monday, October 24, 2011

    Jana Mackey Distinguished Lecture Series: “Real Men, Real Talk” with Tony Porter Monday, October 24 · 7:30pm - 10:30pm, Lawrence, KS

    Time: Monday, October 24 · 7:30pm - 10:30pm

    Location University of Kansas. Woodruff Auditorium.

    1301 Jayhawk Blvd. Lawrence, KS

    Created By Emily Taylor Women's Resource Center

     

    More Info

    The Emily Taylor Women’s Resource Center, in collaboration with campus and community partners, will present this year’s Jana Mackey Distinguished Lecture: “Real Men, Real Talk” on Monday, October 24th, 7:30 p.m. in Woodruff Auditorium. Speaker Tony Porter is an educator and activist who speaks about issues related to masculinity and men taking the lead to challenge negative stereotypes and behavior. He is nationally recognized for his effort to end men's violence against women and is co-founder of A CALL TO MEN: The National Association of Men and Women Committed to Ending Violence Against Women. Click here to see his TED lecture: http://www.ted.com/talks/tony_porter_a_call_to_men.html


    The Jana Mackey Distinguished Lecture Series was established in the spring of 2009 to honor and continue the important work of former KU law student and activist Jana Mackey, who was killed by her boyfriend at the beginning of the 08-09 academic year. In an effort to continue her important work, this lecture series was established to raise awareness about issues close to Jana's heart, namely breaking down barriers and fostering opportunities to secure women's rights leaders and experts with the dual purpose of enhancing understanding and calling for involvement and service while providing a platform for discussion and dialogue. Here is a link for more information: http://janamackeyseries.ku.edu/

    SOMEONE SAVED MY LIFE TONIGHT – It Wasn’t Topeka and their “Lack of Stand’ on Domestic Violence

    In honor of Domestic Violence Awareness Month we want the world to know that we are here… we always have been.  It was only up until recently with the ‘slap in the face’ against domestic violence survivors and victims in Topeka Kansas that our voices have only gotten louder.  We honor our fallen sisters who were not as lucky as we are to have survived a relationship.  We have faith in knowing they are guiding us as we preserve their memory.  Many are now gone but not forgotten, this is for you. http://www.topeka.org/cityofficials/Several Petitions here that have been making a difference, as well as all their contact info Topeka, Shawnee County, Kansas Contact #’s

    highly urge you to sign the petitions for the demand of City Council to stop ‘bitch slapping’ DV victims, and to HIGHLY encourage and DEMAND that the Shawnee County Commissioners Shelly Buhler, Ted Ensley and Mary Thomas to Start prioritizing PUBLIC SAFETY and reinstate funding cut from all of Topeka’s DA, prosecutors, Sherriff and even the morgue.

    Cut instead the funding from parks and recreation. Ted Ensley’s Parks and Gardens, to including but definetly NOT limited to: the Expo Center, the Fancy Public Library, 400K for a new Irrigation System for County Golf Course, several 250K per round-abouts...(sadly this list goes on and on…)

    I strongly urge you to watch this 20/20 Diane Sawyer report on Domestic Violence.

    This is the NORMAL for a Victim/Survivor – (However,She was the lucky one.) The System worked for her, 90% of DV Victims do not walk away with their lives – or as the walking dead-without her children. 

    1 in 4 Women are in or have been in a DV situation as below. 1 in 2 people will know someone who is or has been a DV Situation – or what it really is “Coercive Control” a fundamental loss of life, liberty, and human rights.

    The Courts the System, the Community has failed to Support the women in their lives.

     SOMEONE SAVED MY LIFE TONIGHT

    by mamaliberty

    This woman saved my life. When I was in a violent relationship I saw the particular story on Oprah. I recognized myself in these videos, trying had to be quiet to prevent his hands on me.  The judge who sentenced this abuser was emotional when describing what he saw in that video of Susan.  I wonder what did he see?  Did he realize that domestic violence is far more damaging of a crime than originally thought?  Do we really have the equal protection under law?  We as survivors of intimate partner violence have come a long way.  Just like Susan, I am a far cry from the subservient battered slave I once was.

    If it were not for Susan and the countless other of survivors that have found their voice and share their story to the world to let us know, we are not alone, we are not crazy and you too can survive!  My work on this blog and elsewhere has led me down a path filled with love and empowerment.  My hope for the future is that all women will be protected as every human deserves.  Since we cannot eradicate “abuse” it is up to law enforcement and the judiciary to be well-informed and educated on the subject of domestic violence.  We have not only shattered that proverbial glass ceiling we are coming through it in masses.

    You are not alone, your sisters are all around you, come find us!

     

    Friday, October 21, 2011

    Shawnee County Commissioners: Adequately Fund for Prosecution of Domestic Violence Case's in Topeka, KS

    Sign Petition here:

    http://www.change.org/petitions/shawnee-county-commissioners-adequately-fund-for-prosecution-of-domestic-violence-cases-in-topeka-ks

    Shawnee County Commissioners: Adequately Fund for Prosecution of Domestic Violence Case's in Topeka, KS

     
    Why this is Important

    Topeka, Shawnee County, Kansas: Domestic Violence Victims Need Justice Now!

    The Shawnee County Commission needs to make the ‘Safety’ of Domestic Violence Victims a ‘priority'and get adequate funding in place for the prosecution of Domestic Violence case's and seek Justice for Victims.

    1. Shawnee County Commissioners Cut the District Attorney’s office funding by 10%. (After there was a request for an increase due to the high crime rate).

    2. Shawnee County District Attorney as a result of the Budget Cuts was forced to place all Misdemeanors including Domestic Violence charges on the City of Topeka Court.

    3. The City of Topeka, did not want to pay to do 'Domestic Violence' cases (Although quite capable)

    4. The Topeka City Council, City Manager and Mayor then caused a national outrage by 'Decriminalizing Domestic Violence' and repealing the ban on Domestic Violence within the city limits so that they would not be jurisdiction. http://bit.ly/rgk8TL

    5. Thereby forcing the Shawnee County District Attorney to 'review' the Domestic Violence Cases, as a State law.

    6. Since the City of Topeka, 'Decriminalized' Domestic Violence, the Shawnee County District Attorney of course is now forced to review these cases. (Although the DA's Office does not have sufficient funding and in fact suffered a 10% budget cut)

    7. The Shawnee County Commissioner's still have not provided adequate funding for District Attorney.

    8. District Attorney is now forced to lay off 17% of his staff effective December 23, 2011. http://bit.ly/ogHoer

    The BOTTOM LINE:

    The District Attorney's Office is underfunded, under staffed (unlike the City of Topeka) and still only the most severe crimes will ever make it to trial with most pleading out to avoid cost of trial.

    Domestic Violence Cases - will remain completely without consequence to batterers. At best they will be plead out to 1.) disorderly conduct or 2.) destruction of personal property. To get them out of the system quickly so that what remaining resources can be used for higher level crimes of felony.

    The City of Topeka has ‘repealed’ the ban on Domestic Violence so victims no longer have the City of Topeka Court as an option to fall back on.

    Currently, Domestic Violence Victims now have a better chance of winning the lottery, than having the crimes committed against them ever be prosecuted and Justice still remains denied.

    We strongly urge the Shawnee County Commissioners: Shelly Buhler, Ted Ensley and Mary M. Thomas to make ‘Safety’ a priority and act swiftly to provide adequate funding for all crimes, especially the crime of Domestic Violence in Topeka, KS. read more here: http://www.change.org/petitions/shawnee-county-commissioners-adequately-fund-for-prosecution-of-domestic-violence-cases-in-topeka-ks

    Denise Everhart, Richard Harmon - True ‘elected’ Public Servants Support Victims of Domestic Violence at Rally, Topeka, KS



    Denise Everhart (left) and Richard Harmon (right) two of the three that voted against ‘decriminalizing’ Domestic Violence were also at Topeka, KS YWCA March Against Violence October 21, 2011. More Photos here.
     
    It was so nice to see these Topeka City Council officials at the rally today. (Especially after ‘Manspeaker’s fail’).


    These two (actually 3) have taken a lot of  ‘heat’ from the other 7 members of the City Council that voted to repeal DV as a crime within the city limits. I was so glad they showed up. So were they, they needed the support as well knowing that they din in fact stand up for the ‘right’ thing and voted ‘no’.

    They greeted every one, advocates, survivors and victims, all thanked them for their ‘stand’ against Domestic Violence. They marched with us from the State Capitol down Topeka Blvd with Topeka Police motorcycle (Harley’s even :-D ) escort. When we arrived at the YWCA, they immediately donned gloves and aprons and began ‘serving the public’- hot dogs. The event had about a 150 turn out. Not including the awesome Topeka High Drumline. (video below)
    IMAG0862 IMAG0863
    While I was talking with Ms. Everhart, she informed me that the city council is still getting tons of email (YEAH-KEEP IT UP). That several organizations, groups have boycotted Topeka until they reinstate the ‘bam on Domestic Violence’. I asked Denise how we could help, she stated that we really need to put pressure on the Shawnee County Commissioners. Plain and simple the DA’s office needs that funding to prosecute crimes especially low level DV crimes.

    So we are still no better off than we were before, the city ‘decriminalized domestic violence’—the city has no responsibility –obviously now. But that does not fix the problem. Bottom line, the Commission cut funding to the DA which in turn forced DA to give City all misdemeanor charges including DV. The City decriminalized it-so they would have to prosecute- and now we are back at the DA needing funding. Who holds the key? The Shawnee County Commission.
    Thank you to all who turned out today to support Topeka, KS Victims of Domestic Violence! A Big thanks to my hero’s Denise Everhart and Richard Harmon, you are hero’s to every DV Victim/Survivor Nationally—Internationally! We support you for as you GOOD PUBLIC SERVANTS! You have the World Supporting you and your Stand Against Domestic Violence. Thank you.
    You can thank them personally as well below for taking a stand against Domestic Violence.
    District 4
    Denise Everhart (Voted Against Repeal)
    785-267-4098
    District 9
    Richard Harmon (Voted Against Repeal)
    785-271-6962
    District 5
    Larry Wolgast (Voted Against Repeal)
    785-272-6896
    Those who ‘decriminalized domestic violence’ can be reached below.
    Mayor
    Bill Bunten
    785-368-3895
    District 2
    John Alcala
    785-233-7110
    District 6
    Chad Manspeaker
    785-220-9493
    District 8
    Andrew Gray
    785-806-0068
    District 3
    Sylvia Ortiz
    785-357-0717
    District 7
    Bob Archer
    785-817-8157
    District 1
    Karen Hiller
    785-232-2917
    City Manager Dan Stanley
    785-368-3725
    SHAWNEE COUNTY COMMISIONERS
    200 SE 7th B11
    Topeka Kansas
    66603-3971
    (785) 233-8200
    Ext. 4040
    Chairman (District 1)
    Shelly Buhler
    (District 2) Mary Thomas
    (District 3) Ted Ensley

    TOPEKA HIGH DRUM LINE For DOMESTIC VIOLENCE RALLY

    Insult to Injury- Chad Manspeaker who voted to ‘Decriminalize Domestic Violence’ shows up at Domestic Violence Rally in Topeka,KS

    Hey Topeka Women - SLAP! Slap! Slap!! Compliments of Chad Manspeaker. Just to make sure you didn’t  get ‘Slapped enough’ the first time – see here
    Topeka Voted tonight to Decriminalize Domestic Violence - A Move that Sets Back a 100 years of DV work
    10-21-2011“Manspeaker,who voted with the majority of the council to repeal misdemeanor domestic battery from city ordinance’
    This was insane, Chad Manspeaker, not only showed up at rally but spoke abouthis decision (and 6 others city councilpersons) who voted to ‘Decriminalize Domestic Violence’ with in the Topeka City limits that outraged the Nation. This ELECTED official,  a ‘public servant’ huh? could have fooled me- Had the audacity to show up at OUR DV rally and further had the audacity to ‘explain his decision’STILL thinking he ‘is da man’ - He is not, he is a coward as are the others who voted to further insult battered women--
    And really Chad, while the other two council members Everhart and Harmon (who voted against repealing the ban) were ‘serving the public’ and hot dogs- Manspeaker wouldn’t do ‘public servant work’ he just sat and ate his hotdogs.
    Boooooo Manspeaker—how dare you show up and talk your crap at a rally for survivors and victims of ‘Domestic Violence”- the same that YOU ‘DECRIMILIZED?’
    SLAP!! SLAP!! Take that- you women! I guess abusers are like that. They like to control intimidate and expect you to kneel down and lick his shoes for his greatness in making sure that Victims of Domestic Violence crime is decriminalized.
    Any ways, let him know how victims/survivors do not appreciate his actions.
    Chad Manspeaker , 1304 SW College Ave, Topeka, KS 66604        
    Cell: 220-9493   email: manspeakerfortopeka@gmail.com
    Chad Manspeaker
    Council District #6
    Chad Manspeaker, Councilperson
    1304 SW College Ave., Topeka, KS 66604
    cmanspeaker@topeka.org
    785-220-9493
    Chad Manspeaker (@manspeaker) on Twitter
    Facebook:http://www.facebook.com/ManspeakerForTopeka?v=info

    Monday, October 17, 2011

    Topeka Maneuvers Over Domestic-Abuse Law Outrage Survivors

    From the LA Times

    Claudine Dombrowski
    Claudine Dombrowski tells of having her wrists broken, being hit on the head with a crowbar, getting chipped teeth and, at one point, needing 24 stitches to close a wound. Even when she left her boyfriend, she says, the abuse didn't stop. Ultimately, she says, she was left on total disability.

    “I called the police, I did all the right things, I ended up in court, and on a good day, it got reduced from domestic violence to disorderly conduct,” Dombrowski, a Topeka, Kansas, resident and now an advocate for abuse survivors, told the Los Angeles Times on Thursday.

    So Dombrowski was outraged when misdemeanor domestic abuse — already an insult, she thinks, for not being equal to an assault charge — went unpunished for a month in Topeka after a local funding dispute turned into a circular firing squad that caught battered women in the center.

    The county didn’t want to pay for prosecuting misdemeanor domestic battery; the prosecutor didn’t want to take the cases without more resources; and the city didn’t want to pay for handling the cases either.

    Meanwhile, as many as 30 abuse suspects went free before the city of Topeka, in a legal maneuver, forced Shawnee County prosecutor Chad Taylor to resume prosecution of the cases — by dramatically pulling its own domestic abuse law from the books. The state has its own law, which the prosecutor would need to enforce.

    “The fact that it happened just makes me feel pretty worthless, you know?” Dombrowski said. “We spend millions of dollars on public service announcements saying we [domestic-violence victims] don’t have to live this way ... and you really do.”

    Times have been tough for local governments. The economic buck stops with them because they don’t get to run on debt the way the federal government does, and some of the collapses have been spectacular.

    Harrisburg, the capital of Pennsylvania, threw up the white flag this week and declared bankruptcyafter a failed $300 million incinerator project capsized the city’s budget. The city manager formoribund Vallejo, Calif., has one assistant; she has to lock the door when she leaves, because there’s no one else in the office.

    But for women, the symptoms of the municipal budget crisis are especially stunning in the sleepy prairie metropolis of Topeka. There, the symbolic decriminalization of domestic violence has thrown a spotlight on a chronically underreported issue in a state where women’s advocates are used to fighting uphill battles.

    “We live in Kansas, where we are used to taking a lot of punches on the chin,” said Kari Ann Rinker, state coordinator for Kansas NOW, which recently saw the state legislature try to defund Planned Parenthood.

    Republican Gov. Sam Brownback’s conservative stances have led a few residents to derisively dub the state “Brownbackistan.”

    But beyond the familiar battlefronts over abortion, domestic violence hits especially close to home. In 2008, Jana Mackey, a 25-year-old Kansas NOW lobbyist who volunteered to aid victims of sexual assault and domestic violence, was found slain in an ex-boyfriend’s home.

    “When I went in front of the county commission in Shawnee County about this issue [funding prosecutions for domestic abuse in Topeka], I brought everything I had, and I was emotional,” said Rinker. “Sometimes I’m accused of being less than professional. But I’ve tried to do this nicely, to fight this mentality in this state, and we’ve reached this point where we need to stop being nice and start rattling some cages to do so.”

    Added Dombrowski: “If these people really cared about women, they would come up with the money. They wouldn’t argue about it.”

    The past month has been treacherous for domestic abuse survivors in Topeka, according to Becky Dickinson, program director for the Topeka YWCA Center for Safety and Empowerment, which she said saw an increase in the number of women needing help.

    “It became a very scary and dangerous time for victims to get law enforcement involved,” Dickinson told The Times, adding that victims “were calling the police and seeing their abusers being arrested but getting released in 48 hours.”

    In an abuse situation, Dickinson said, abusers are often the most dangerous after they’ve been arrested. They come home looking for revenge. Needless to say, Dickinson said, “victims were concerned” about the budget spat.

    Dickinson said that in 2010, the Topeka YWCA helped 1,305 county residents with services and counseling for domestic and sexual violence, assisted with 586 protection orders, housed 190 women and children in a shelter, and received nearly 2,000 calls to its crisis hotline.

    Those numbers are likely low. Domestic violence often goes unreported. So it’s a dark irony that Topeka’s new time in the international limelight comes during Domestic Violence Awareness Month. “Now Topeka is known as the domestic violence capital of the world,” Kansas NOW’s Rinker said.

    Whether the county prosecutor’s announcement that it is resuming prosecutions will fix the problem remains to be seen; the prosecutor’s office is expected to lay off almost a fifth of its staff by the end of the year, which could impact the prosecution of domestic violence cases that the office just resumed prosecuting.

    “Even on a good day, it doesn’t work,” Dombrowski said of Topeka’s handling of domestic abuse victims. “And now it’s even worse.”

    --Matt Pearce in Kansas City
    Twitter.com/mattdpearce

    Photo: Claudine Dombrowski, left, a survivor advocate, greets Amber Versola, a lobbyist for Kansas National Organization for Women, on Tuesday at a rally at the Shawnee County Court House in Topeka, Kansas. Credit: AP / The Capital-Journal, Anthony S. Bush

    Topeka's "Week Without Violence" Begins Today in the Only City in the Nation that 'Decriminalized Domestic Violence

    "Week Without Violence"

    I am saddened.  The City Council continues to twist and mince words. The bottom line and  in simple English is -

     YES, THEY DECRIMINALIZED DOMESTIC VIOLENCE within the city of Topeka.


    See some of the other posts on this site.

    They want to be called hero's? They are cowards.
    They think that they know what is best for domestic violence victims? They are wrong.

     

    The YWCA begins its week with out violence in the First City in the Nation to decriminalize Domestic Violence. See event here: and please be sure to attend the March on Friday where all the State, City and County Gov. officials will be leading the March.
    KEEP WRITING the city council  (express your outrage over their thoughtless and heartless repeal of Dv) and Write the city commissioners  we need the DA's office funded!  We need help!!

    The Attorney General Derek Schmidt knows that  Domestic Violence Victims will suffer (MORE than they have already) from budget cuts and reduced staff in DA office.

    As for all those on the City Council who voted to repeal ban -- “You have not helped us “- You have hurt us -even more.

    Happy "Week with out Violence" in honor of "National Domestic Violence Awareness Month".
    Topeka has become an 'abuser' to battered women as well as an already broken system and sympathy for abusers. Be ashamed, be very ashamed.

    Labels: DISTRICT ATTORNEY, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, FUNDING, MISDEMEANOR CHARGES, TOPEKA, Topeka City Council, Topeka Kansas Decriminalize Domestic Violence"

    Wednesday, October 12, 2011

    Topeka Kansas: Successfully Votes Making "Domestic Violence Legal"

    From Times Up!!

    By Susan Murphy Milano

    In Topeka, Kansas on October 11, 2011, members of the City Council voted and successfully repealed the city's ordinance banning domestic violence during National Domestic Violence Awareness Month. Talk about a punch, a kick and slap for victims of intimate partner violence by city government’s financial misconduct as their excuse for not wanting to do their jobs. At the center of dysfunction, the absent District Attorney Chad Taylor, who is refusing to prosecute domestic violence crimes in the city.
    During the two hour televised council meeting, the one sided discussion from 7 of the 10 elected members amounted to nothing more than political finger pointing. Leading the charge, and ultimately dictating the vote, was Interim City Manager Dan Stanley, brow beating those during the hearing into submission of his way or the highway. It was classic manipulation "101" presented in a live stream real time format.
    According to National Advocate, organizer and expert Claudine Dombrowski, inattendance at the City Council meeting, “I witnessed the Council of elected officialssupport the decriminalization of domestic violence within the city limits of Topeka and berate speakers, who were survivors and victims. The elected council members temper tantrums during the meeting and finger pointing were disgusting.”
    Approximately 24 years ago, after years of lobbying by victims, advocates and families of those slain by their partner, legislation was signed by Governors nation-wide making domestic violence a crime. The pen used to sign the bill, was not filled with ink, but the blood of all those who lives were lost at the hands of those professing to love them.
    This "stunt" today will cost Topeka more than the mere 10% budget shortfall cited by city officials as the reason not to prosecute. Expect an increase in intimate partner related missing persons cases (providing they will still be allowed to make a report) and count on more funerals for those victims whom the police did not respond.
    This certainly gives new meaning to creating prevention and awareness duringNational Domestic Violence Awareness Month, doesn't it?

    · “16,800 homicides (that are reported) attributed to intimate partner homicide per year, 2.2 million medically treated injuries costing $37 BILLION per year.[i] [CDH1]
    · The cost of intimate partner violence exceeds $5.8 billion dollars each year; $4.1 billion of which is for medical and mental health services.”[ii]
    · Almost one-third of female homicide victims that are reported in police records are killed by an intimate partner.[iii]
    · In 70-80% of intimate partner homicides, no matter which partner was killed, the man physically abused the woman before the murder.[iv] [CDH2]
    · Less than one-fifth of victims reporting an injury from intimate partner violence sought medical treatment following the injury. [v][CDH3]
    · Intimate partner violence results in more than 18.5 million mental health care visits each year.[vi]
    [i] NCDAV reporting sourced from: The Cost of Violence in the United States. 2007. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Centers for Injury Prevention and Control. Atlanta, GAhttp://www.ncadv.org/files/DomesticViolenceFactSheet(National).pdf
    [ii] NCDAV reporting sourced from: The Cost of Violence in the United States. 2007. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Centers for Injury Prevention and Control. Atlanta, GA
    http://www.ncadv.org/files/DomesticViolenceFactSheet(National).pdf
    [iii] Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reports “Crime in the United States, 2000,” (2001)
    [iv] NCDAV report sourced from: Campbell, et al. (2003). “Assessing Risk Factors for Intimate Partner Homicide.” Intimate Partner Homicide, NIJ Journal, 250, 14-19. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice
    [v] U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, “Intimate Partner Violence in the United States,” December 2006

    [vi] Costs of Intimate Partner Violence against Women in the United States. 2003.

    ****

    Susan Murphy Milano is a staff member of the Institute for Relational HarmReduction and Public Pathology Education. She is a specialist with intimate partner violence prevention strategies and high risk cases and available for personal consultations through the Institute. She is also part of the team atManagement Resources Limited of New York.
    Susan is the author of "Time's Up: A Guide on How to Leave and Survive Abusive and Stalking Relationships,"Moving out, Moving on, and Defending Out Lives. Susan is the host of The Susan Murphy Milano Show, "Time's Up!" . She is a regular contributor to the nationally syndicated "The Roth Show" with Dr Laurie Roth and a co-host on Crime Wire.

    Saturday, October 8, 2011

    Topeka, KS: “Outraged” KS-NOW Spearheads Protest at City Hall and DA’s Office - Over Domestic Violence Debacle. Tuesday October 11, 2011 4PM

    Spearheaded by KS-NOW: Kansas National Organization for Women

    Topeka’s Plan to decimalize Domestic Violence – In Domestic Violence Awareness Month –no less. shame.

    Several National Media Articles – under Google search  in News “Topeka Domestic Violence”

    Time   Tuesday, October 11 · 4:00pm - 7:00pm

    Location  200 SE 7th St. Topeka, Ks. 66603

    Kansas National Organization for Women

    More Info

    Come protest the District Attorney Chad Taylor's office from 4 pm- 5:30 pm. We must stand up against the decisions being made regarding women and their families' lives due to budget cuts right here in Kansas.

    Bring your signs!

    Following the protest there will be a city council meeting in the same building starting at 6 pm.

    We need people to come in masses and please call the Shawnee County Courthouse if you would like to speak at the meeting in order to get your name on the docket before 5 pm on Tuesday. Please send the word out and your presence is needed in this time of lost priorities. We will hand out purple ribbons at the protest.
    *If you do wish to speak (and call to put your name on the list), they request that you limit your time to 4 minutes MAX.