All in the family

I have to say I’m disappointed, but not wholly surprised at some of the reaction to the news — and the decision to post the news — about the domestic violence allegations against David Howard.   Let me just say that the decision to post the information did not come lightly and  I know I struggled with it.   But even my struggle to post about it bothers me too.   Because that tells me that domestic violence, while I recognize is a crime, somehow still manages to occupy a place in our society that still makes it untouchable in some people’s eyes.

If the victim had been a stranger on the street that had similar injuries inflicted, there wouldn’t been these protestions of the issue being a family problem or a personal problem.   Much like what happened to a certain individual who was running for office, it would be newsworthy.   Folks wouldn’t be making excuses about it being a personal problem and I wouldn’t have hesitated to write about the issue.

The fact that the alleged assailant was David Howard made the decision to write about this — for me — more difficult as opposed to gleefully reveling in his woes.    Because of the incredibly personally destructive behavior David Howard has peddled in over these past few years, anything written about him is sure to bring cries of political payback.   Think John P. was the only person to receive a Christmas Eve letter from David Howard’s lawyers threatening a lawsuit?   Think again.   At least four other individuals received letters, my household received two sets.

When a political blogger, who actually wrote the story about Joel Young’s domestic violence issues, dismisses domestic violence allegations as “not news”

I don't think the allegations against the author of @ActionAlameda is news. I'm sure the police do since he's been tough on them

— Steven Tavares (@eastbaycitizen) March 19, 2012

That’s when you know that the public perception about the severity of domestic violence as a criminal act has a long way to go.

The issue of domestic violence is a tricky one because it involves someone very intimate in someone’s life.   But these cries that exposure will make it more difficult for the victim and the family to heal is exactly the type of reasoning that has kept domestic violence issues out of the spotlight.   Telling domestic violence victims that it’s a personal problem or a family matter tells them that they shouldn’t have involved anyone outside the family and should have handled it within the family.   That, personally, is less helpful to the victims of domestic violence because then they feel shame for involving outsiders in what some have termed a “family problem” instead of what it is: a criminal act.

What we should be saying to these victims is that you are supported and you did the right thing.   I can’t imagine the courage that it takes to call the police on your spouse or intimate partner.   Then to have to go through the process itself and navigate the criminal justice system must be equally agonizing and difficult which is why many victims end up not cooperating with prosecutors.

I brought up the situation with San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi because it parallels well with this one.   If anyone had been tracking the discussion around the whole saga, there were many allegations that the inquest into this was politically motivated as well, but what elevated the shock-worthy factor was that incredibly flippant statement that minimized a serious crime to something that should be handled within the family, from the SF Weekly:

[T]he language Mirkarimi has used to describe the situation has deeply troubled legal scholars with an expertise in the state’s domestic violence laws. For a top city law enforcement official to describe abuse allegations in which a police report has been filed and an investigation is under way as “a private matter, a family matter” — as Mirkarimi did — is both legally incorrect and sends the disturbing message that accusations of domestic violence are to be kept behind closed doors.

In fact, Nancy K.D. Lemon, a lecturer at U.C. Berkeley’s Domestic Violence Law Seminar, notes that one of the questions on her recent final exam was “Give some examples of how we are moving away from seeing domestic violence as a private, family matter.”

The notion that allegations of domestic abuse belong out of the public eye is “a very antiquated view of domestic violence,” Lemon says. “A century ago we thought it was a private, family matter. We found a lot of people were hurt — or killed.” Rather than treat domestic violence as a domestic problem, Lemon notes, it is now seen as a crime against the state. That’s why prosecutors can move ahead with charges, even if the alleged victim refuses to cooperate, or even actively opposes the process.

To classify domestic violence as a problem for families to sort out on their own exposes a mentality “predating the 1970s,” says professor Marisa Cianciarulo, the director of Chapman University’s Family Violence Clinic. The nation’s first Domestic Violence Protection Act was enacted in Pennsylvania in 1976; California followed shortly thereafter. Prior to that time, an attack that, by a stranger, would constitute battery could go uncharged if it was received in a domestic attack.

But the pendulum has shifted. Lemon notes that a lower standard is necessary for a felony charge in domestic battery than in a general case. “Police often tell me it’s seven stitches or a broken bone,” to garner felony charges in a battery case, she says. “In domestic violence, on the other hand, even something as minor as a bloody nose, a scratch or bruise, or a black eye could result in a felony arrest.”

What’s more, the old “she started it” defense doesn’t hold. Police now look for the “dominant aggressor.” Who started the fight “is irrelevant,” Lemon continues. “The real question is, who responded appropriately or who overreacted?”

In short, the law has changed a great deal since allegations of domestic violence truly were a family matter. To claim the same today “sends the message that it’s okay for the head of the household to be abusive with his or her spouse or partner,” says professor Wendy Seiden, Cianciarulo’s colleague at the Family Violence Clinic. “It says violence is okay if it’s in the family.”

And while someone mentioned there are two sides to every story, that is absolutely correct, but as the experts note, it doesn’t matter who and how the argument started, it matters who responded appropriately and the message that should be sent is that violence is never okay.