ABA Domestic Violence Writing Competition

The ABA Commission on Domestic Violence recognizes the vital role that rising lawyers play in the success of protecting and empowering those affected by domestic violence. In order to encourage and recognize law school students committed to ending domestic violence, the Commission launched an annual law student writing competition in 2004.

Two years ago, VLS student Judith Cutler received second place.

Deadline for submissions is Friday, March 30, 2007, 5:00 p.m. EST via email at runger@staff.abanet.org. See http://www.abanet.org/domviol/students.html for more information.

Becoming One of “them”

Becoming one of “them”: Expanding our Definition of Domestic Violence

Meghan Clark JD 2008

When we hear the term “domestic violence,” what first comes to mind? A person may think of physical family disputes, hitting, punching, or kicking. But what about a verbal threat or a hand gesture intended to intimidate? Are we willing to go so far as to label these acts “domestic violence?” Maybe you are wondering why we should even care about this topic. Why bother? “Domestic violence couldn’t happen to me,” you think. That’s exactly what I used to say.

Five years ago, I began what gradually spiraled into an abusive relationship. It is only now that I am able to recognize this. I was a junior in college when it all started, and everything seemed perfect. He was attentive, sincere, and the perfect southern gentleman—for awhile. We were engaged, essentially living together, and even peacefully coexisting on many days.

I cannot point to that first argument, the moment when things changed, but one day I woke up, and I realized that I simply was not myself anymore. I no longer spent time with my friends. I was on edge all the time. I did everything I could to avoid making my partner upset. There was a lot of yelling, a lot of threats, and even more tears and apologies. There were no bruises. There was no hitting: a shove here and there, but never the kind of thing I had read about—and I definitely read a lot. As an undergraduate English major, the American Heritage Dictionary was like my “bible.” But nothing about my relationship fit into its definition of “domestic violence.” The American Heritage states that domestic violence is “violence toward or physical abuse of one’s spouse or domestic partner.” I knew that definition. I lived by my definitions. But that wasn’t my relationship, so I could continue to ignore it—could continue to deny the abuse.

Now, five years later, I have learned that many abusive relationships don’t fit this narrow definition. And American Heritage isn’t the only reference book that excludes relationships like mine. Merriam-Webster’s main entry for domestic violence includes only acts of physical violence between family or household members. Britannica Online slightly expands its definition to include any type of abuse between members of the same household. According to the state of Vermont, “abuse” involves physical violence between “family or household members” as well as “placing another in fear of imminent serious physical harm.” But what about the psychological and emotional “assault” that I lived with for years? If our publicly accessible reference materials aren’t dealing comprehensively with the term, how can we ever expect the average citizen to comprehend all that constitutes domestic violence?

So, again, why should you care? It takes years to change definitions and even longer to get the public to accept these newly defined terms. Such reform needs to happen, however. For women like me, it is easy to distance yourself from the problem if you don’t fit the definition. Women in relationships with “domestic violence” will always just be one of “them”—the others—until we expand our definitions. In any recovery program, you hear the mantra that admitting the problem is the first step. Similarly, the first step in combating domestic violence must be recognizing that your relationship fits into this definition.

It is not so much for legal reasons that I hope to expand the basic definition of domestic violence; it is for someone like me who needed to fit into a definition. From my own personal experiences and from my recent educational opportunities, I have learned that domestic violence does not begin with the first slap. Long before any physical altercations or threats of violence occur, many abusers envelop their partners in a web of emotional degradation and isolation; it’s about time our definition reflects this phenomenon.

To define everything that could constitute the earliest signs of domestic violence would take up a whole book by itself. This does not mean, however, that we cannot educate ourselves on the subject and begin to get at the problem from its root. In addition to passing laws to protect an abused partner once the bruises have already surfaced, if a man or a woman can identify himself or herself in a definition, maybe they will be able to seek the help that I didn’t even realize I needed. It may not be much, but if we take the small step to look at our reference materials and work to better define the very concept of “domestic violence,” then perhaps this is a good place to start in our campaign to put a stop to such an unfortunately common problem.

Protecting Children From Domestic Violence

Rebuttal Presumption Statute:

A Solution toward Protecting Children From Domestic Violence

Sharie Robinson, JD 2007

Domestic Violence is a destructive behavior that affects the entire family. We tend to focus primarily on the women who are encountering the physical and emotional abuse, but sometimes overlook the trauma children experience. To better protect the needs and interest of children, the Vermont Legislature should amend the “Best Interest of Child” statute to incorporate a Rebuttal Presumption against custody in Domestic Violence. This statute prevents individuals that abuse their spouses from obtaining custody of their children. The implementation of this statute is necessary to protect children witnessing their mother continued abuse; to keep them from developing emotional and behavior problems to prevent a cycle of violence from generation to generation.

Presently, there is an estimate of 3.3 million to 10 million children in the United States that are exposed to domestic violence each year. This exposure to domestic violence leads to many mental and physical disorders that can disrupt healthy development and prevent progress in school. Many children imitate these violent behaviors in future relationships and continue the cycle from generation to generation.

Thus, to help children grow and develop in a healthy and safe way, it is important to implement measures that will prevent children from being exposed to family violence.

Currently, Vermont utilizes the “best interest of the child” standard to handle divorce and child custody cases.

“…the court shall make an order concerning parental rights and responsibilities of any minor child of the parties. The court may order parental rights and responsibilities to be divided or shared between the parent on such terms and conditions as serve the best interest of the child. When the parents cannot agree to divide or share parental rights and responsibilities the court shall award parental rights and responsibilities primarily or solely to one parent…”

The "Best Interest of the Child" is a friendly statute that tries to meet the needs of the child by working with both parents to provide a healthy and stable environment. However, it is not effective in domestic violence cases. For example, if the judge orders joint custody for a couple that has had incidents of domestic violence, then the child remains at risk. In a joint custody arrangement, the abuser still has constant contact with the victim through the child. Additionally, the victim may be reluctant to allow the child to visit the other parent because of the potential abuse that could be afflicted upon the child as a result of the separation or divorce. Moreover, the victims’ compliance with the judges’ order puts the victim back into a continuous cycle of abuse, manipulation, and domination, which the state should be preventing as an overall objective. The current law is thus ineffective in protecting the child from further abuse and fails to prevent the victim from involvement with her abuser.

In domestic violence cases, the court must take domestic violence incidences into account in determining a child custody case. An abusive parent is not a fit parent because battering a child’s mother is equal to child abuse.

Solution: Rebuttal Presumption Against Custody in Domestic Violence

Implementing a statutory provision that has a rebuttal presumption against custody when domestic violence is present is an effective way to protect children. The presumption will not burden the victim with providing evidence of correlation between the wife abuse and child abuse from witnessing domestic violence. A presumption helps to prevent judges from awarding custody to an unfit parent who commits domestic violence. Moreover, a rebuttal presumption would help to cast a light on the continue abused that could follow if a judge grants joint custody. This statute is crucial in circumstances where judges are uneducated or biased on the issue of domestic violence and believe that the best interest of the child is to always have both parents involved in the child's life. Therefore, the Vermont legislature should act now to make our children lives safer and a future without family violence.