Thursday, December 31, 2009
Philly Not Foreign to Domestic Violence
Ian Urbina writes that Philadelphia Police Department is eyeing the uptick in fatalities that spring from continued IPV. And while the overall homicide rate has decreased, Urbina notes "there have been 35 domestic homicides since January — a 67 percent increase from 2008."
Patricia Georgio-Fox, deputy police commissioner, is quick to point out that IPV offenders are already known to law enforcement and that "there are often warning signs that the crime is coming." She is quite right. The question, then, is what to do about it?
New police protocol will arm officers with complete knowledge of incidents at residences where IPV has occurred. Included will be information regarding issuance of restraining orders as well. This is a positive step in the right direction. However these measures only address the response perspective.
In 1994 the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) was passed. While it was revised in 2000 and 2005, certain measures introduced in the original version live on in practice. For example, states dealt with IPV then (and still do) within the rubric of "mandatory arrest", which requires officers to take into custody the primary aggressor in an IPV incident, and "presumptive arrest", which gives officers the option based on the circumstances involved.
Some states also utilize a "dual arrest" strategy where there isn't necessarily a presumed aggressor. In such cases both participants are taken into custody.
Unfortunately, research shows that mandatory arrest has had a disproportionate effect on minorities and low income couples, encouraged immigration fraud, and has typically conflated one-time IPV with continuous IPV that requires court intervention.
Low income and minority offenders lack access to quality legal services and are apt to accept plea deals. With a criminal record these groups will have less access to needed public services, job opportunities, and decent housing.
By amending the Immigration and Nationality Act so that undocumented immigrants can receive residency when making a claim of abuse and have access to free legal services, the VAWA is making it more likely that false claims of abuse will be made.
Moreover, mediation and counseling are not used enough to determine if a couple's situation is viable, or requires court intervention. One would think, then, that treating all IPV cases with court intervention would be at the very least an effective solution. It is not.
During training for my Court Appointed Special Advocates (CASA) volunteer program, which aims to intervene in IPV cases involving children and advocate for that child's interest, I sat in the Richmond Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court observing IPV cases. Some of which were known as "kiss and make up" cases, instances where a plaintiff (predominantly female) would withdraw a claim of abuse and ask that the charges against the defendant be dropped. It usually would be, and that would be it.
Couples weren't referred to mediation or counseling. They basically went home with a warning but no more prepared to deal with what precipitated the conflict in the first place. Couples such as these would be better off if they were referred to some type of counseling. So much for an effective response.
More needs to be done a federal level (for one, amending VAWA) and the state level (for one, exorcising mandatory arrest) to effect change when it comes to IPV. What the Philadelphia Police Department is doing is excellent but addresses one side.
As Urbina's article notes IPV will continue to be a major issue as the economy inches its way out of recession Vulnerable populations shouldn't be made more vulnerable by a lack of effective policy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
0 comments:
Post a Comment