John Lewis
English 15 section 95
Policy Paper Abstract
This paper will provide an in-depth explanation of why the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA) must be re-authorized by Congress to protect and support women who are victims of domestic violence. The sources cited in this paper include the statistics of domestic violence in America before and after the implementation of VAWA, personal testimonies from victims of domestic violence about the unjust system in place to handle domestic violence cases, and commentary from op-ed writers for the New York Times. This paper will expose the flaws in the system and propose a solution to make the system in place more protective, compassionate and effective.
John Lewis
English 15 section 95
Policy Paper
Killing an attacker in self-defense is a legally acceptable situation and it is not punishable by law in the United States. However, that seems to change when the attacker is the spouse of the person being attacked. Every year, millions of women across America are victims of domestic violence and the United States justice system does them no favors. Unfortunately there is no way to completely eliminate domestic violence in America, but the way the legal system handles cases of domestic violence must change to better protect, support, and seek justice for victims of domestic violence. The Violence against Women Act of 1994 must be re-authorized by Congress to ensure this progress.
Women should not be incarcerated for killing their abuser; it is often the only way they can escape a potentially fatal environment. However, women do not need to kill their abusive partner to be jailed. In 2005, Katina Britt refused to testify against her ex-boyfriend who allegedly brutally beat her. The Independent Institute wrote “a California judge has ordered her to be jailed on contempt of court charges” (McElroy). The law is supposed to protect and serve citizens of the United States, but the legal system is abusing Britt just as much as her ex-boyfriend did. Here is a victim of a heinous crime who did not commit a crime of her own, yet she is the one in jail for refusing to testify against the man that has caused her to fear for her life. Our legal system responds to the situation by giving Britt two choices; Britt can face her attacker (who may be freed and able to find her) or she can face a prison sentence. There is no compassion or support for the real victims in situations like Katina Britt’s.
Women that do kill their attackers are often faced with murder charges and are sentenced to long prison terms. Vicky Williams of Missouri was convicted of hiring a hit-man to kill her husband who Williams claimed “sexually, physically, and mentally abused her during their seven-year-marriage” (Alexander). Williams was in jail for 32 years and was blindly labeled as a violent criminal, a murderer, by the justice system that fails to acknowledge the constant danger domestic violence victims life in every day. Another domestic violence victim, Kim Dadou, was imprisoned for 17 years for killing her then-husband to ensure her safety. Dadou spoke out against the courts’ handling of domestic violence victims to the Legislative Gazette, saying “I was in the court room getting orders of protection just a couple months before I was in the court room being charged with murder” (Verette). These women are receiving no protection or compassion from the courts, and justice is being miscarried. Abused women need to trust the legal system so they know they will be protected when they can make their way out of a violent and hostile environment.
The first step to fixing this problem is to cease incarceration of battered women. When a woman is abused by her partner, she should not be subjected to imprisonment for murder (like Vicky Williams and Kim Dadou), or contempt of court (like Katina Britt). An abused woman will likely be fearful of facing her attacker in court, and testifying against that person could simply make them a target for further abuse later on. The prosecutor in Katina Britt’s case told The Independent Institute, “approximately 75 percent of [domestic violence] victims are reluctant to testify” (McElroy). In court, the victim’s testimony is obviously crucial to the prosecution of suspected criminals. A recorded video testimony should suffice in situations where the victim feels too threatened and overwhelmed to face her attacker in real life. Clearly there will be opposition such as “If a woman wants a man in jail she can face him in court,” but that does not do justice to the emotional stress and abuse the woman has undergone at the hands of the man she must face. The insensitivity toward victims by our justice system essentially forces these women to face the men who terrorize and desecrate them. There is no compassion or care shown for the victims in our legal system.
In 1994, then-senator Joe Biden drafted the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). The bill was met with widespread bipartisan support and it was signed into law later that year. VAWA was instrumental in creating a network of support for victims of domestic violence as well as bring domestic violence to the forefront of national attention. VAWA even established an Office on Violence Against Women in the United States Department of Justice. The New York Times reported “The law expired in 2011 and has become the focus of a fierce bipartisan battle over competing versions of reauthorization bills.” The differing reauthorization bills focus on who will be protected under the VAWA. A small group of House Republicans do not want to include same-sex couples or illegal and undocumented immigrants in the Act. The only fair and logical solution is to swear to protect all people under the act regardless of gender, sexual orientation, or legal status. If a person is abused in America it is up to the American justice system focus on prosecuting the abuser, not questioning the person being abused. The reauthorization process is ongoing with no signs of an agreement coming soon. While Congress fights over the exclusion of certain groups, people are being beaten, raped and killed.
In order to include all people in the Violence Against Women Act on the national level, we must first be united at the state level. The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence states that “Delaware, Montana and South Carolina specifically exclude same-sex relationships from their domestic violence laws.” These states must amend their current laws to adapt to modern times. The issue of domestic violence does not relate in any way to the same-sex marriage debate. Same-sex couples are more prominent now than ever before in the United States. Regardless of whether their marriage should be recognized in their home state, a personal attack on one person by another should always be recognized by the law as illegal. If the attacker and victim did not know each other, it would be considered an assault and a crime. Why does their relationship abolish the attacker of his crimes? It does not. The law should not ignore violent crimes because of sexual orientation. Local activism and national attention should be made to this issue to stimulate public concern and demand that these laws recognize domestic abuse as abuse regardless of the couple.
The programs of support implemented by the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 are not going to be in place if Congress does not reauthorize the law. The Act was funded to help pay for legal support of domestic violence victims, the upkeep of crisis centers and hotlines that women must be able to access, and other forms of victim protection. An abusive man could be the sole breadwinner for his family, and the dilemma that a woman faces (particularly an abused mother) is whether she should stay for the kids or if she should leave for herself. If the battered woman safely escapes with her children, she often does not have a place to go. That is where VAWA came in. The programs and crisis centers funded by VAWA would assist the woman and children in finding work, temporarily providing a safe place to live, and further aiding the victims in starting a new life away from their previous home environment. Women escaping domestic violence everywhere are looking for somewhere to go and since VAWA is currently expired, these women have a significantly smaller amount of options available to them.
The Violence Against Women Act has produced concrete evidence that it has been effective since its implementation in 1994. The Los Angeles County Bar Association published a chart displaying the statistics of domestic violence in their jurisdiction. The amount of domestic violence calls involving hands, fists and feet decreased from approximately 53,000 in 1994 (the inaugural year of VAWA) to 41,000 in 2002. If these policies were in effect right now, and they protected all people, the amount of domestic violence cases nationwide would decrease as they have in recent years. The American Bar Association’s Commission on Domestic Violence states that “approximately 1.3 million women and 835,000 men are physically assaulted by an intimate partner annually in the United States.” Together, that is more than two million people being ignored by Congress’ inability to come to their senses and reauthorize VAWA.
In conclusion, the United States does not properly protect or serve victims of domestic violence. The victims are abused by the legal system just as much as they are abused by their partner, and it is time we put a stop to it. The Violence Against Women Act needs to be reauthorized by Congress to include all people in the United States. It is an unjust travesty that Congress believes some people are not worthy of legal protection but others are. As Americans, we will have failed our own if we allow this gross miscarriage of justice to continue as it is. These victims need compassion and understanding, not jail sentences and legal abuse.
Works Cited
Alexander, Caitlin. “Battered Justice: A Domestic Violence Victim’s Life After Prison.” KOMU.com. N.p., 7 May 2012. Web. 10 Nov. 2012. <http://www.komu.com/news/battered-justice-domestic-violence-victim-s-life-after-prison/>.
“Domestic Violence Fact Sheet.” National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. N.p., 2011. Web. 10 Nov. 2012. <http://www.ncadv.org/files/DomesticViolenceFactSheet(National).pdf>.
LA County Stats Chart Calls. Digital image. Los Angeles County Bar Association. N.p., 2002. Web. 10 Nov. 2012. <http://www.lacba.org/Files/Main%20Folder/DomesticViolence-norightnav/images/LA_County_Stats_Chart_Calls.png>.
McElroy, Wendy. “Don’t Jail Domestic Violence Victims.” The Independent Institute. N.p., 14 Dec. 2005. Web. 10 Nov. 2012. <http://www.independent.org/newsroom/article.asp?id=1638>.
Verrette, Amanda. “Domestic Violence Victims Want Shorter Prison Terms.” LegislativeGazette.com. N.p., 23 Apr. 2012. Web. 10 Nov. 2012. <http://www.legislativegazette.com/Articles-Top-Stories-c-2012-04-23-81601.113122-Domestic-violence-victims-want-shorter-prison-terms.html>.
“Violence Against Women Act.” New York Times. N.p., 16 May 2012. Web. 10 Nov. 2012. <http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/d/domestic_violence/index.html>.