Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction

Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

cloudboy -> Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/19/2013 4:13:32 PM)
The New Yorker had a great article in its JUL 22, 2013 edition entitled, Annals of Prevention, A Raised Hand, Can a new Approach Curb Domestic Violence. The short answer is YES, and the background to this answer was very interesting. One in every four women is a victim of domestic, physical violence at some point in her life. Between 2000-06, 3,200 American soldiers were killed; during that period, domestic homicide in the USA claimed 10,600 lives. (Likely an under-reported figure.) A domestic violence worker in Massachusetts named Kelly Dunne came up with a method of coordinating the work of courts, the police, and domestic violence workers to feed information to a "high risk team" that would assess the risk of homicide in domestic cases. Women at high risk of being murdered had a history as follows: (1) Had sought help from the police and criminal justice system at least one time; (2) a prior instance of physical domestic violence; (3) increased danger spiking when a victim attempted to leave an abuser; (4) a change in the household such as a pregnancy or a new job; (5) a victim has been separated from her abuser for less than three months time; (6) the abuser was also a substance abuser; (7) the abuser owned a gun; (8) the abuser demanded forced sex, made threats to kill, and/or engaged in choking the victim; (9) the abuser was chronically unemployed. Weighing factors 1-9, the high risk domestic violence team would score the likelihood of a homicide. A points scale from 0-18 was devised with an "18" denoting extremely high risk of homicide. With a threat index in place, abusers could be interdicted before committing violence. For instance a high danger score coupled with a restraining order violation would result in a dangerousness hearing. This could lock the abuser up and force him into counseling. The victim then did not have to move into a shelter to seek protection. Before this system was put in place, police, courts, and domestic violence workers only realized the dangerousness factors after the fact. Long story short, this method, when applied effectively, seriously reduces the commission of domestic violence homicides. All in all, I found this very heartening news.

LadyPact -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/19/2013 5:31:53 PM)
Mark the calendar, cb! I think we finally found something we agree on. (Is there a link to a longer version of the article or is this pretty much it?) (1) Had sought help from the police and criminal justice system at least one time; Agreed. Most women tend to realize a person is dangerous before something actually happens. (3) increased danger spiking when a victim attempted to leave an abuser; Beyond doubt. (5) a victim has been separated from her abuser for less than three months time; Yes. That seems to be the time period that one person has a higher obsession with the other. (7) the abuser owned a gun; I'd have probably added had access to a gun. We have laws on the books that DV convictions are supposed to get guns away from abusers. We're just really bad at the follow through. (8) the abuser demanded forced sex, made threats to kill, and/or engaged in choking the victim; This is the only one I had trouble with. We have all kinds of kinks that potentially fall in these areas. Consent/non consent dynamics, rape play, breath play, etc. Some kinky people would earn points in this area just because of enjoying these activities. (9) the abuser was chronically unemployed. The stats on this one would be interesting.

AthenaSurrenders -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/19/2013 6:13:42 PM)
This was my old job, pretty much. Our risk assessment included a few more criteria (we also considered factors that might relate to forced marriage, drug and alcohol abuse and children in the home). We did the assesment and then held a multi-agency meeting with the police, the health service, social services (child protection), the local council, various shelters and emotional support services. They came up with a plan about how to help. We did things like restraining orders, home security, found shelters, set up security measures around the children's schools, found them financial help, fitted police-linked panic alarms. went to court while they gave evidence and occasionally gave evidence ourselves. In the UK, removing the offender from the household was trickier. There really needed to be a police callout - then they could either arrest the offender or if there was no crime to record on that occasion they could impose a new type of one-month injunction called a 'go-order', that gave us time to put everything else into place. Without that our only real option was to move the victim to safety if he or she didn't want the police involved - though in my experience those who rented and could change homes fairly easily generally felt safer somewhere else that the offender didn't know about. It sound so obvious but this was revolutionary stuff five years ago. My job was to advocate for the victim, so I'd go to child protection hearings or housing interviews, help them find solicitors, make safety plans with the kids and basically do all the extra things that the police don't do for them. Sounds like this has even more power, which is awesome. Identifying the danger is half the problem. Out of the 500 or so clients we dealt with while I was there, we never lost one. Unfortunately we lost a police officer who was murdered by her fiance. Nobody knew what she was going through until it was too late.

ARIES83 -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/19/2013 7:02:51 PM)
Seems like a smart proactive approach.

cloudboy -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/19/2013 7:15:26 PM)
LP: You can Google the article, but the New Yorker is asswipey, not letting those without a subscription see their archival content. This is why I didn't link the article. ------- A.S.: One counter intuitive point the article made was this: "The average batterer is more likeable than the victim because domestic violence affects victims a lot more than it does batterers. Batterers don't lose sleep like victims do. They don't lose their jobs, they don't lose their kids." In contrast, victims come across as messed up. This is why batterers are often able to fool the system, they're so charming, and the victim comes off as very negative. A.S. I 'm curious what you think of this ^^ observation. That was kind of illuminating to me.

AthenaSurrenders -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/19/2013 7:51:37 PM)
Hm, that's an odd statement and it's hard to quantify how likeable people are. The cases I worked with really spanned the spectrum of people. I worked with victims who were doctors and solicitors, I also worked with heroin addicts. Elderly people, 16 year old mothers, and a whole bunch of just regular people. As you can imagine, they were all very different and of course it's easier to find a rapport with some people than with others. I think it's in my personality to find something likeable in just about everyone I come across so maybe I am not the right person to ask. The abusers fell into two broad categories - the thug, and the manipulator (this is my own experience not from any official research). The manipulator is the person who is able to play the game - smooth, nicely spoken, calm when the police arrive, clever. These people are very convincing and can come across as quite sympathetic because they are fairly skillful in hiding the abuse and casting doubt on the other person. On the other hand, the 'thug' type are often known for violence in other contexts like drunken brawling, they come across as quite aggressive, they are basically the all-round violent brute. They are more likely to get physical but less likely to have as much skill in manipulation - their power comes mostly from brute force where the manipulator is more likely to erode self-esteem and undermine the victim's reasoning. I hope that makes some sort of sense. So yes, some offenders are very likeable on the surface. And, at the risk of sounding cruel, a domestic abuse victim can be very draining to deal with. Typically there are many many incidents before they reach out for help. They think very little of themselves, their logic is impaired, they are paralyzed by fear and desperate for emotional connection and validation. As you can imagine, it can be very easy for that person to become quite emotionally needy to friends, relatives or service workers. And often, they might have a strong need to pour out their experiences and worries but not be ready to take action - it is frustrating to listen to someone say 'I am scared and miserable' but refuse to do anything about it. It was hard for me, and that was with the benefit of training and experience which helped me to understand WHY they thought the way they did. It must be even harder for family members and colleagues etc. There is probably some truth in the passage you quoted although it is an oversimplification. For every victim who was 'messed up' and negative, there was one who was remarkably tough in the face of adversity. And for every charming offender there was an idiot. Edit to add: I think that in many cases people do know there's something not right about the perpetrator, but it is often easier for the third party to believe the friendly, happy party when he/she says the other person is just depressed/bitchy, than to wade into another person's despair. I think there's a bit of self-preservation going on. Domestic violence has a big negative impact on the people surrounding the couple. It certainly still affects me and I wasn't watching my loved ones go through it.

Moonlightmaddnes -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/19/2013 7:52:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy The New Yorker had a great article in its JUL 22, 2013 edition entitled, Annals of Prevention, A Raised Hand, Can a new Approach Curb Domestic Violence. The short answer is YES, and the background to this answer was very interesting. One in every four women is a victim of domestic, physical violence at some point in her life. Between 2000-06, 3,200 American soldiers were killed; during that period, domestic homicide in the USA claimed 10,600 lives. (Likely an under-reported figure.) A domestic violence worker in Massachusetts named Kelly Dunne came up with a method of coordinating the work of courts, the police, and domestic violence workers to feed information to a "high risk team" that would assess the risk of homicide in domestic cases. Women at high risk of being murdered had a history as follows: (1) Had sought help from the police and criminal justice system at least one time; (2) a prior instance of physical domestic violence; (3) increased danger spiking when a victim attempted to leave an abuser; (4) a change in the household such as a pregnancy or a new job; (5) a victim has been separated from her abuser for less than three months time; (6) the abuser was also a substance abuser; (7) the abuser owned a gun; (8) the abuser demanded forced sex, made threats to kill, and/or engaged in choking the victim; (9) the abuser was chronically unemployed. Weighing factors 1-9, the high risk domestic violence team would score the likelihood of a homicide. A points scale from 0-18 was devised with an "18" denoting extremely high risk of homicide. With a threat index in place, abusers could be interdicted before committing violence. For instance a high danger score coupled with a restraining order violation would result in a dangerousness hearing. This could lock the abuser up and force him into counseling. The victim then did not have to move into a shelter to seek protection. Before this system was put in place, police, courts, and domestic violence workers only realized the dangerousness factors after the fact. Long story short, this method, when applied effectively, seriously reduces the commission of domestic violence homicides. All in all, I found this very heartening news. Interesting. My mother grew up in a very violent home and at a time police didn't involve themselves in that kind of thing. So my mom in her rush to escape the non stop drinking and fighting ran off with my dad into a new nightmare all her own. So as far as I remember at least once a week the police were at our house. But it was the early 80's in a very small town of 200 people and my dad was on the local fire department. They were all good friends so it was more like come on woman quit pissing him off and he will quit beating the crap out of you. I remember my mom leaving many times but for some reason she would go back and it would be worse then ever. My mom made us kids stay upstairs but I still hear her begging him to stop. I thought at the time he was breaking the furniture. I found out much later as an adult he was throwing my mom into the furniture and that is how it broke. Now I kinda shudder at what it took to break an old oak dinning room table. I don't think my dad ever got a new job so I can't comment on that one. She was never separated from him for long so I do not think it was longer then 3 months. He drank very heavy and used several drugs. My uncle a few years back told me it was a shame my mom left him cause he got the best pot. I was too stunned to comment on that. My mom is his sister and he knew how my dad treated her. Not sure about a gun but the night that my mom finally had enough and left for good was the night he really tried to kill her. I barely remember it, all I remember is screaming at him to stop hurting my mom and my mom crying. My mom tells me I came down the stairs while he had her pinned and was trying to stab her. Thankfully I do not remember that part, but I do remember that was the night we left for good. I do not remember most of my childhood, my mom says that is probably a good thing. It was not a happy childhood. Another thing I learned through a friend that was in an abusive relationship is that men that abuse their wives are more likely to sexually abuse their children. She learned this when she caught her husband abusing their daughter and the domestic violence councilor told her. Years later my mom learned that my dad was molesting my sister for years, and that is why she wanted to leave our house so bad. My sister went to live with other family not long before my mom left. She looks back now and says it was just a matter of time before he started on his younger daughter, me. Good thing she left.

cloudboy -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/19/2013 8:45:39 PM)
A.S. Thanks for the reply. I have an immigration client right now who left her husband because he was snorting too much coke, was very moody, and kept guns under the bed. He would go on benders, too. No outright domestic violence according to her, but something is off about her. She is scared of the guy. I called her husband (they are separated) and he begged off from talking to me. My sixth sense said was that there was something creepy about him. It was in his tone, the way he changed when he found out I was working for her. Now it looks like she might drop me as her lawyer. I am partly relieved by that b/c I had a hard time establishing a good connection to her (that is important between a lawyer and a client.) We'll see. ----- Thanks for the thug / manipulator dichotomy. That makes sense to me. Your description of victims was also eye opening.

cloudboy -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/19/2013 8:56:23 PM)
Thanks for sharing your story. I really cannot imagine what you went through. Glad you and your mom got away.

TheHeretic -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/19/2013 10:34:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy "The average batterer is more likeable than the victim because domestic violence affects victims a lot more than it does batterers. Batterers don't lose sleep like victims do. They don't lose their jobs, they don't lose their kids." In contrast, victims come across as messed up. This is why batterers are often able to fool the system, they're so charming, and the victim comes off as very negative. A.S. I 'm curious what you think of this ^^ observation. That was kind of illuminating to me. A few years back, I had a call come in to my desk from a DV victim, and it was an awful experience. She had a problem, and a tangled story, but every question just led her into some kind of nasty, off-topic comment. I spent five minutes just trying to get her name. Finally, a female co-worker came in from her break, and I transferred the call. She was able to move right through, and start the process to get some help for the caller. It really bothered me. I kept replaying the conversation, re-reading my notes, and trying to figure out what had gone wrong where. I'm very good at my job, and simply had not been able to do it with her. Two days later, I was still stewing on that conversation, when she called back, and talked to the female office manager. She asked her to apologize to me, said I had been extremely professional, and explained that she was in intensive therapy at a DV center. She simply couldn't talk to a man, without trying to antagonize him to the point of abuse. Fucked up bitch. I hope the therapy worked. I won't condone that sort of violence against women (though there are varieties we enjoy the hell out of in my house [:)]) but if I had a tape of that call, I'd get it to her imprisoned ex-boyfriend's parole board.

AthenaSurrenders -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/20/2013 12:41:04 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy A.S. Thanks for the reply. I have an immigration client right now who left her husband because he was snorting too much coke, was very moody, and kept guns under the bed. He would go on benders, too. No outright domestic violence according to her, but something is off about her. She is scared of the guy. I called her husband (they are separated) and he begged off from talking to me. My sixth sense said was that there was something creepy about him. It was in his tone, the way he changed when he found out I was working for her. Now it looks like she might drop me as her lawyer. I am partly relieved by that b/c I had a hard time establishing a good connection to her (that is important between a lawyer and a client.) We'll see. ----- Thanks for the thug / manipulator dichotomy. That makes sense to me. Your description of victims was also eye opening. I can imagine that being very difficult. I worked in an area with a large Pakinstani/Bangladeshi immigrant community and the hardest cases were those where the victim didn't have indefinite leave to remain in the country. We had people who were suffering horrible abuse, often from their entire extended family, who feared that returning to their home country would result in further abuse for shaming the family, who often didn't speak English, who feared being separated from their British born children, who had no idea whether the police/social services in this country could be trusted... and because they had the wrong type of visa they weren't eligible for many forms of help. Not eligible for housing benefits = not eligible for a women's refuge. The application to stay in the country under the domestic abuse exception was lengthy and difficult to prove and in the mean time they had no one to turn to. They couldn't pay for their refuge places themselves because the family had all the money, they often couldn't legally work and even if they could they didn't speak the language and had no qualifications. Awful, awful situation - and of course, perpetrators knew about this and would sometimes purposely let their spouse's visa lapse to prevent them seeking help, since they would be alerting the authorities to their illegal status. I hope your case turns out well.

Exidor -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/20/2013 8:27:16 AM)
Reports of domestic violence seem to be rather one-sided. I know of two men who had to get restraining orders against women who had repeatedly attacked them. It seems that under local law, if a woman attacks a man, it's likely to be ignored. Any type of physical defense automatically becomes male-initiated domestic violence.

kalikshama -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/20/2013 9:33:06 AM)
quote: A domestic violence worker in Massachusetts named Kelly Dunne came up with a method of coordinating the work of courts, the police, and domestic violence workers to feed information to a "high risk team" that would assess the risk of homicide in domestic cases. My mother told me about this New Yorker article a few weeks ago because she thought it mentioned some programs in my state of Mass. that might be helpful to my housemate (no DV - she's an alcoholic with mental health issues.) I have asked her to bring it to me when she comes by tomorrow. I can access it online via her subscription, but it's not formatting for the web and very hard to read.

kalikshama -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/20/2013 9:39:12 AM)
Jared Remy ordered held without bail on charges he murdered his girlfriend, stabbing her in front of at least one neighbor He was in their grasp and then he was gone. Jared W. Remy was arraigned in Waltham District Court Wednesday on charges of slamming Jennifer Martel’s face into a mirror in their townhouse. But prosecutors declined to seek bail, allowing him to leave the court with nothing more than an order not to abuse Martel, with whom he lived and had a 4-year-old daughter. The following night, police were called back to the townhouse in Waltham, where they found Remy covered in blood and Martel, his girlfriend, slashed to death beside a pink tricycle and other toys on their patio. “If they had kept him, maybe my daughter would be alive today,” Martel’s mother, Patty, said in an interview. “But he went back and finished the job.” On Friday, the top Middlesex prosecutor defended the decision to not seek bail for Remy earlier in the week. “On Wednesday, a [bail] request was made based on the information that we had on Wednesday,” said Middlesex District Attorney Marian T. Ryan. “Obviously and tragically, there is different information today, Friday morning.’’ Friends and relatives said Martel, 27, an aspiring teacher who worked at a nearby Market Basket to provide for her daughter, had been trying to extricate herself from what she told them had become an abusive relationship with Remy, the son of famed Boston Red Sox player and broadcaster Jerry Remy. “I talked to her on Wednesday; she said she was planning her escape,” said Patty Martel, who on Friday was driving from her home in Virginia to Massachusetts. “It started off she was very happy with him, but, as time went on, he showed his true colors, and it got worse and worse.” ...There were many warnings signs, including a history of violence against women, aggression, and steroid abuse, friends and family said. ...In Waltham District Court Friday, prosecutors said Remy, 34, attacked Martel in their kitchen, living room, and on a stairway before pinning her to the ground of the patio, where he stabbed her repeatedly, in the view of several neighbors. At least one neighbor in the Windsor Village apartment complex tried to pull the burly Remy off Martel, but was driven back when Remy began trying to strike him with the knife, Assistant Middlesex District Attorney Lisa McGovern said. “Great force and great effort was made by this defendant in stabbing Ms. Martel over and over and over again,’’ McGovern said, in what she called a “protracted struggle.” Benjamin Ray, a resident of the complex, said he tried to help Martel, but declined to be specific because of the ongoing homicide investigation. “It’s not an easy thing to watch; it’s not an easy thing to try and stop,’’ said Ray, who called Martel “a great girl” and “a great mom.” “I did what I could to stop it. And it wasn’t enough.” Read more: http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013/08/16/officials-investigate-fatal-stabbing-waltham-one-person-custody/JIZ9yd9NNs9W4TunYMLXGL/story.html

cloudboy -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/20/2013 10:13:11 AM)
This is about domestic violence murder and successful ways to prevent it from happening. ----- K: Yes, the New Yorker Online sucks.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/20/2013 10:19:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cloudboy This is about domestic violence murder and successful ways to prevent it from happening. ----- K: Yes, the New Yorker Online sucks. Yes it is. But it seems that many folks seem to believe that only men are guilty.

AthenaSurrenders -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/20/2013 10:28:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Exidor Reports of domestic violence seem to be rather one-sided. I know of two men who had to get restraining orders against women who had repeatedly attacked them. It seems that under local law, if a woman attacks a man, it's likely to be ignored. Any type of physical defense automatically becomes male-initiated domestic violence. I can't speak for where you live but I certainly had male clients when I did this for a living and male victims were taken seriously by the police. There are big issues facing male domestic abuse victims, but in my experience they tend to be social barriers to reporting - stigma of a male being a victim instead of just 'dealing with it'. That and a lack of resources for men in terms of shelters. When we dealt with serious injuries and risk of death, it was overwhelmingly male offenders. I'm not talking he-said-she-said bickers in which two adults fall out and someone calls the police over some shouting, I'm talking about those cases that you come into work every morning dreading the news that your client is dead. It's not a myth that men commit more violent crime than women. In my totally non-scientific opinion, it also seemed to me that women were more likely to go down for similar level offenses than men - there almost seemed to be an additional level of disgust when a violent offense was committed by a woman. Restraining orders are a very good idea, regardless of which party is the victim. If you're not intending to cause problems you shouldn't have any difficulty in complying with it, and (In England at least) it criminalises further contact. It takes away the ambiguity which is often present in stalking and harassment cases because it's formalized by the court that you can and will be arrested if you contact the other party.

NuevaVida -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/20/2013 12:01:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Exidor It seems that under local law, if a woman attacks a man, it's likely to be ignored. Any type of physical defense automatically becomes male-initiated domestic violence. Where I live (CA), a man close to me was attacked by his partner. One call to the police and she was immediately removed and a restraining order underway. Meanwhile I could not get a restraining order from my ex who was stalking and threatening me, because I couldn't prove he had already hurt me.

hlen5 -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/20/2013 1:39:01 PM)
messed up the quote.

hlen5 -> RE: Domestic Violence Against Women -- Effective Interdiction (8/20/2013 1:42:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kalikshama ...........At least one neighbor in the Windsor Village apartment complex tried to pull the burly Remy off Martel, but was driven back when Remy began trying to strike him with the knife, Assistant Middlesex District Attorney Lisa McGovern said. ........... That's why God invented baseball bats...

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875