Hello, For those of you who teach/cover the subject of domestic violence, this article may interest you.
A clear case of blaming the victim? JPG Judge's Ruling Roils Arena of Wife Abuse January 6, 2002 - - NY Times By FRANCIS X. CLINES LEXINGTON, Ky., Jan. 4 - The violent arena of domestic abuse litigation has grown a bit more volatile here, now that a judge has decided to hold two women in contempt of court for returning to men accused as their batterers after obtaining emergency orders of protection against them. "You can't have it both ways," ruled Judge Megan Lake Thornton of Fayette District Court in levying fines of $100 and $200 in recent weeks against the two women who obtained protection orders but admitted they later relented and returned. "It drives me nuts when people just decide to do whatever they want," said Judge Thornton, who is experienced in the state's thick domestic abuse docket, which produces close to 30,000 emergency orders of protection a year. State officials describe what they say is a virtual epidemic of abusive relationships in the state. Judge Thornton's ruling has alarmed advocates for battered women, who plan to appeal it. The advocates say that the finding goes beyond existing law and is unrealistic because some renewed contacts often prove unavoidable in domestic abuse cases, which involve economic and family dependencies and other complications of daily living. The state office on domestic violence has pointedly agreed, warning that the ruling could cause abused women to hesitate in bringing their plight before the courts for fear of being chastised for their trouble. "The reality is it's easy to say they should never have contact," said Sherry Currens, executive director of the Kentucky Domestic Violence Association, an advocacy and legal protection group. "But we're talking about people in long-term relationships. They may have children in common. It's pretty hard to say, `Never speak again.' People have financial difficulties. They may love the partner. It's not an easy thing." But Judge Thornton declared in court, "When these orders are entered, you don't just do whatever you damn well please and ignore them." The ruling stunned Cindra Walker, the lawyer for the two women, who is with Central Kentucky Legal Services, which represents many of the thousands of indigent women in the state caught in abusive relationships. "For over five years, I've been in court practically every day on these abuse cases, and I've never before had a victim threatened with contempt," Ms. Walker said. "The domestic violence law is a tool for victims to use to be safe," not a device to punish them, she said. Judge Thornton's office said she could not comment on the pending cases under judicial rules. But her two rulings made clear that she expected the original protection orders against all contact to apply equally to the person suspected of abuse and the abused. "They are orders of the court," the judge declared, according to court transcripts obtained by The Lexington Herald-Leader. "People are ordered to follow them, and I don't care which side you're on." Carol Jordan, the director of the Governor's Office of Child Abuse and Domestic Violence, said she disagreed with Judge Thornton's ruling even as she sympathized with the professionals who must try to oversee violent domestic situations. "These are tough cases for judges," Ms. Jordan said. "They are dealing with complex human emotions. They are dealing with danger." But if the ruling stands, Ms. Jordan warned, some abused women will conclude that they will not be treated fairly if they ever gain the courage to seek refuge in the courts. This sort of ruling "absolutely increases abused women's level of risk" by seemingly encouraging their abusers, Ms. Jordan said. In Kentucky, as in much of the rest of the nation, abuse victims have increasingly turned to the courts in as protection orders have become more accepted, said Billie Lee Dunford-Jackson, assistant director of family violence law and policy for the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges. Most judges, but not all, "have been making clear to the batterers that the issue is between the state courts and them," Ms. Dunford- Jackson said, rather than a domestic issue between two parties. A "sizable minority" of judges may still equate the conflicting parties in their rulings, she estimated, but newer state laws have increasingly put the focus on violent abuse as the main problem requiring state protection. Ms. Walker's two clients, Jamie Harrison and Robin Hull, declined to be interviewed. "Our big concern now is the chilling effect this will have," said Ms. Walker, one of two legal service lawyers handling hundreds of abuse cases in 17 counties. The Kentucky Legislature considered a proposal two years ago that would have specified that the orders of protection applied equally to the person accused of abuse as well as the victim, Ms. Jordan noted. But it never passed. The notion of mutual protection equating the two parties is not now part of state law, Ms. Jordan emphasized. She contended that Judge Thornton's ruling, if extended in that direction, would "establish a barrier that stops abused women from seeking protection of the courts." --- You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
