PAGENO="0001"
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: PREVENTION AND SERVICES
7L'*~ ~
HEARINGS
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SELECT EDUCATION
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
NINETY-SIXTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
HEARINGS HELD IN WASHINGTON, D.C., ON JULY 10, 11, 1079
Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Labor
0
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
49-914 WASHINGTON: 1979
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, ITS. Government Printing O~ce
Washington, D.C. 20402
PAGENO="0002"
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR
CARL D. PERKINS, Kentucky, Ulia(rrnam
FRANK THOMPSON, Ja., New Jersey
JOHN BRADEMAS, Indiana
AUGUSTUS F. HAWKINS, California
WILLIAM D. FORD, Michigan
PHILLIP BURTON, California
JOSEPH M. GAYDOS, Pennsylvania
WILLIAM (BILL) CLAY, Missouri
MARIO BIAGGI, New York
IKE ANDREWS, North Carolina
PAUL SIMON, Illinois
EDWARD P. BEARD, Rhode Island
GEORGE MILLER, California
MICHAEL 0. MYERS, Pennsylvania
AUSTIN J. MURPHY, Pennsylvania
TED WEISS, New York
BALTASAR CORRADA, Puerto Rico
DALE E. KILDEE, Michigan
PETER A. PEYSER, New York
EDWARD J. STACK, Florida
PAT WILLIAMS, Montana
WILLIAM R. RATCUFORD, Connecticut
RAY KOGOVSEK, Colorado
DON BAILEY, Pennsylvania
JOHN LI. ASHBROOK, Ohio
JOHN N. ERLENBORN, Illinois
JOHN H. BUCHANAN, Ja., Alabama
JAMES M. JEFFORDS, Vermont
WILLIAM F. GOODLING, Pennsylvania
MICKEY EDWARDS, Oklahoma
E. THOMAS COLEMAN, Missouri
KEN KRAMER, Colorado
ARLEN ERDAHL, Minnesota
THOMAS J. TAUNB, Iowa
DANIEL B. CRANE, Illinois
JON HINSON, Mississippi
THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin
SuBcoMMITTEE ON SELECT EDUCATION
PAUL SIMON, Illinois, Chairman
JOHN BRADEMAS, Indiana KEN KRAMER, Colorado
EDWARD P. BEARD, Rhode Island B. THOMAS COLEMAN, Missouri
GEORGE MILLER, California ARLEN ERDAHL, Minnesota
AUGUSTUS, F. HAWKINS, California JOHN M. ASHBROOK, Ohio,
MARIO BIAGGI, New York EE Officio
EDWARD J. STACK, Florida
CARL D. PERKINS, Kentucky,
Ea, Officio
(H)
PAGENO="0003"
CONTENTS
Hearings held in Washington, D.C. on: Page
July 10, 1979
July 11, 1979 147
Statement of-
Allen, Clara L., Director, New Jersey Division on Women, Depart-
ment of Community Affairs, Trenton, N.J 67
Allison, William MT., deputy director, Community Services Admin-
istration 213
Barnes, Hon. Michael D., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Maryland; accompanied by Cynthia Anderson and Lise
Moulton 13
Boggs, Hon. Lindy, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Louisiana
Brown, Sam, Director, ACTION: accompanied by Torrie Mattes,
Office of Policy and Planning; Kathleen Fojtik, National Technical
Assistance Center; and Sharon Vaughan, Women's Shelter, St. Paul,
Minn 181
Campbell, Jane, National Council of Churches 150
Dames, Cynthia, battered womens project, Santa Fe, N. Mex 140
Edeistein, Dr. Saul, director, emergency services, George Washington
University Hospital 39
Ferraro, Hon. Geraldine, a Representative in Congress from the
State of New York 5
Fleming, Richard C.D., Deputy Assistant Secretary for Neighbor-
hoods, Voluntary Associations and Community Protection, Depart-
ment of Housing and Urban Development; William Allison, Deputy
Director, Community Services Administration - 209
Goodrich, Hon. George Herbert, associate judge of the Superior Court
of the District of Columbia, head of the Family Division 50
Green, Kinsey, executive director, American Home Economic Associa-
tion 159
Grimes, J. Robert, Assistant Administrator, Office of Criminal Justice
Programs, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration; accom-
panied by Jeannie Neidermeyer-Santos, program manager, family
violence program 188
Halsey, Capt. Patricia, U.S. Marine Corps; and Lt. (jg.) Serge R.
Doucette, Jr., Bureau of Medicine and Surgery for the Navy, head
of family advocacy program 58
Hyde, Hon. Henry J., a Representative in Congress from the State of
Illinois 16
Marschner, P.J., director of program development, Center for Women
Policy Studies, accompanied by Diane Hamlin, director, Resource
Center 228
McMahon, Ginger, martial abuse project, Delaware County, Pa 136
Meyer, Jeanie Keeny, police department, Kansas City, Mo - 33
Mikulski, Hon. Barbara A., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Maryland 23
Moore, Janice, My Sister's Place, Washington, D.C 133
Nazeer, Freda,, director, legislation and research, General Federation of
Women's Clubs on behalf of Mrs. Quint 198
Olson, Beth, Junior League, Jacksonville, Fla - 154
Pence, Ellen, State Director of battered women's programs, Depart-
ment of Corrections, St. Paul, Minn 107
Ramirez, Blandina Cardenas, Commissioner, Administration for
Children, Youth and Families, Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare; accompanied by June Zeitlin, Office of Domestic
Violence~ 166
Stahly, Geraldine, Wornen5helter, Long Beach, Calif 128
Warren, Faye, General Federation of Women's Clubs, deputy director
for the Hands Up program 200
(I")
PAGENO="0004"
Iv
Prepared statements, letters, supplemental materials, et cetera.-
Allen, Clara L., director, New Jersey Division on Women, Depart-
ment of Community Affairs, Trenton, N.J.:
"Accused Wife Slayer Defied Court," newspaper article from Star Page
Ledger, October 3, 1978 93
"Atlantic County Abuse Center, Counseling, Referral, and
Shelter Program for Victims of Domestic Violence," article
entitled 87
"Battered Women's Guide," a leaflet 84
Prepared statement of 71
"Section 10-Coordination of Federal Programs" - 90
"Section 11-Definitions" 92
"Senate Committee Substitute for Senate No. 807" 95
"Senate No. 3244" 98
"Shelter for Battered Filled to Capacity," newspaper article from
Star Ledger, March 11, 1979 94
Allison, William, Deputy Director, Community Services Administra-
tion:
Factsheet 216
Information requested entitled "Community Services Adminis-
tration Support of Domestic Violence Projects" 220
Prepared statement of 214
Barnes, Hon. Michael D., a Representative in Congress from the State
of Maryland, prepared statement of 13
Boggs, Hon. Lindy, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Louisiana, prepared statement of 2
Brown, Samuel W., Director, ACTION Agency, prepared statement
of 183
Campbell, Jane, National Council of Churches:
Letter to Chairman Simon, dated July 11, 1979 149
Prepared statement on behalf of 147
Dames, Cynthia, battered women's project, Santa Fe, N. Mex., pre-
pared statement of - 117
Doucette, Lt. (jg.) Serge R., Jr., Medical Service Corps, U.S. Navy
Reserve, head, family advocacy program, Bureau of Medicine and
Surgery, Department of the Navy:
"Family Advocacy: Program Elements and Format," article
entitled
Prepared statement of
Fleming, Richard, C. D., Deputy Assistant Secretary for Neighbor-
hoods, Voluntary Associations and Community Protection, Depart-
ment of Housing and Urban Development:
Letter to Chairman Simon, enclosing information requested 219
Prepared statement of 212
Goodrich, Hon. George Herbert, associate judge of the Superior Court
of the District of Columbia, head of the Family Division, prepared
statement of
Green, Kinsey, executive director, American Home Economics Asso-
ciation, prepared statement of 156
Grimes, J. Robert, Assistant Administrator, Office of Criminal Justice
Programs, Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, prepared
statement of 192
Hyde, Hon. Henry J., a Representative in Congress from the State of
Illinois, prepared statement of 16
Marschner, P. J., director of program development, Center for Women
Policy Studies, prepared statement of 235
McMahon, Ginger, administrative Director of a domestic violence
project, Delaware County, prepared statement of 125
Meyer, Jeanie Keeny, police department, Kansas City, Mo. prepared
statement of 31
Mikuiski, Hon. Barbara A., a Representative in Congress from the
State of Maryland, prepared statement of 23
Miller, Hon. George, a Representative in Congress from the State of
California, prepared statement of 30
Moore, Janice, My Sister's Place, Women's Legal Defense Fund,
Washington, D.C., prepared statement of 123
Olson, Beth, Junior League, Jacksonville, Fla., prepared statement oL. - 151
PAGENO="0005"
V
Prepared statements, letters, supplemental materials, etc--con.
Pence, Ellen, State Director of battered women's programs, Depart- Page
ment of Corrections, St. Paul, Minn., prepared statement of - 101
Quint, A. M., president, General Federation of Women's Clubs, pre-
pared statement enclosing a resolution 202
Ramirez, Blandina Cardenas, Commissioner, Administration for Chil-
dren, Youth, and Families, Office of Human Development Services,
prepared statement of 171
Stahly, Geraldine Butts, executive director, WomenShelter, Long
Beach, Calif., letter to Select Education Subcommittee, dated July
10, 1979, enclosing a statement 119
Warren, Faye, General Federation of Women's Clubs, deputy director,
Hands Up program:
Prepared statement of 204
Projects of:
Battered Spouses-Big Rapids Intermediate Women's
Club, Mich 208
Battered Spouses-Junior Women's Club of Golden Beach,
Md 206
Child Abuse and Neglect (CA/N) North Carolina~ 205
Family abuse and neglect prevention and education program. 206
Haven Hills, Inc.-Canoga Park Women's Club, Canoga
Junior Women's Club, Calif - 207
West Virginia's campaign against child abuse and neglect~ 207
APPENDIX
"Battered Wives," article from Baltimore Jewish Times 530
Carstenson, Dr. Blue, legislative director, Minnesota Social Service As-
sociation, St. Paul, Minn., letter to Congressman Erdahl, dated July 9,
enclosing testimony 244
Catania, Susan, chairwoman, Illinois Commission on the Status of Women,
letter to Chairman Simon, dated June 1, 1979 - 409
Center for Women Policy Studies:
"A Message To Parents About: Child Sexual Abuse," a publication
entitled - 436
"Family Violence Program," fiscal year 1978, local projects 461
Literature, a listing of publications 491
Response to violence and sexual abuse in the family, a publication
entitled:
Vol. 2, No. 2, November/December, 1978 - 410
Vol. 2, No. 5, March 1979 418
Vol. 2, No. 6, April 1979 -- 426
"Violence In the Home Is A Crime Against The Whole Family,"
a publication entitled 453
"What If Your Child Has Been Sexually Molested," a booklet entitled_ 458
Cochran, Johnnie L., Jr., assistant district attorney, Los Angeles, Calif.:
Congiessionaltestimony 407
Letter to Chairman Simon, dated July 6, 1979, enclosing recommenda-
tions 402
Cotter, Hon. William R., a Representative in Congress from the State of
Connecticut:
"Help for Battered Women in Connecticut," a list 261
Testimonyof 258
DASH, Inc., a group of citizens in a 13 county area of eastern Kentucky,
testimony of 280
Family Service Association of America and The National Conference of
Catholic Charities, position statement 262
General Federation of Women's Clubs, Washington, D.C.:
"Domestic and Personal Violence," article entitled 509
Hands Up booklet 500
Hands Up objective, 1979 508
Kuhle, Shirley J., president, Nebraska Task Force on Domestic Violence:
"Rural Perspective on Domestic Violence," statement on 321
Statement presented to Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
July 9, 1979 328
Moakley, Hon. John Joseph, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Massachusetts, testimony of 314
PAGENO="0006"
VI
Page
National Council of Jewish Women, New York, New York, testimony of_ 272
National Technical Assistance Center on Family Violence, Ann Arbor,
Mich., summary report of domestic violence assistance organizations_ - - 330
Nordenbrook, Ruth, chairperson, Committee of Women and Criminal
Justice, Section of Criminal Justice, American Bar Association,~ state-
ment on behalf of 245
Parolla, Helen R., director, Public Policy Center, National Board, YWCA,
testimony of 270
Pence, Ellen, State Director, Minnesota programs for battered women:
"Minnesota Data Collection on Battered Women: System Design and
Data Analysis," excerpt of a report 287
Testimony of 284
Pines, Burt, city Attorney, city of Los Angeles, Calif., domestic violence
program 367
Schindler, Jayne, legislative chairman, Colorado Eagle Forum, WTheat_
ridge, Colorado, Statement in Opposition to H.R. 2977, dated Oct. 4,
1979, enclosing several newspaper articles_. 537
Simons, Larry L., national vice president, International Brotherhood of
Police Officers, statement of 256
Stern, Barbara, Rockland Family Shelter for Victims of Domestic Violence,
Nyack, N.Y., written testimony of 241
Stonehill, Harriet, director of Public Affairs, B'nai B'rith Women, Wash-
ington, D.C., statement of 277
Womens Justice Center, Detroit, Mich., statement of 499
PAGENO="0007"
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: PREVENTION AND SERVICES
TUESDAY, JULY 10, 1979
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Su~cOMMIrriE ON SELECT EDUCATION,
OF THE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR,
Washington, D.C.
The subcommittee met at 9:50 a.m. in room 2257, Rayburn House
`Office Building, Hon. Paul Simon, chairman of the subcommittee,
presiding.
Members present: Representatives Simon, Beard, Miller, Stack,
Kramer, and Erdahi.
Staff present: Judith Wagner, staff director; Thomas Birch, coun-
sel; Sylvia Corbin, executive secretary; Rhonda Barovsky, secretary;
and Jennifer Vance, minority legislative associate.
Mr. SIMON. The subcommittee will come to order.
Last year this subcommittee first looked into the plight of families
troubled by violence. Witnesses told of the widespread nature of family
violence, and for many women there is no alternative but to leave
their homes. Yet, communities often lack the resources to develop
services for prevention of abuse and aid to victims.
Those testifying agreed Federal funds could stimulate support of
shelters and help battered women. There is now before this subcom-
mittee legislation to provide this Federal support. Our hearings today
and tomorrow will provide us a chance to consider that legislation and
to examine further the serious problems faced by women who are
abused.
Witnesses this morning include people from those institutions in
our society which often come into contact with battered women first,
police, doctors, and the courts, and provide some help, but usually are
not able to give the kind of support needed by a woman who has been
beaten. The shelters that have been set up in communities for battered
women attempt to offer these services.
We will hear this morning, too, from individuals working directly
in shelters. Today's hearings should give some picture of what has
been done and what is still lacking.
I might add that two members of our subcommittee, Representative
George Miller and Representative ErdahL have also been among the
leaders in seeing that we move on legislation in this area.
I am pleased to call as our first witness one of the cosponsors and
leaders in this area, one of the most distinguished Members of the
House, Representative Lindy Boggs. We are pleased to have you here.
[Prepared statement of Hon. Lindy Boggs follows:]
(1)
PAGENO="0008"
2
TESTIMONY BY U.S. REPRESENTATIVE LINDY (MRS. HALE) BOGGS
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, it is a great
pleasure to be here this mornhing for hearings on the Domestic Violence Preven-
tion and Services Act, a bill which our colleagues Barbara Mikulski and George
Miller and I have been working for several years now. I know that I speak for
all the cosponsors-and we have about 70 thus far-when I say that we deeply
appreciate the interestof Chairman Paul Simon and the Subcommittee members
in this bill and this issue, and I feel confident that these hearings will be the
springboard for further congressional action..
Because we have numerous distinguished witnesses who will address the
national trends concerning violence in the home, I would like to direct my brief
remarks to the idea of a Federal role in responding to the problem of
family violence.
I share the concern many of our colleagues express over the pervasive influence
of the Government in the personal and business affairs of our citizens, and there-
fore in no way do I-or any.of the cosponsors-envision that the Federal role in
assisting victims of family violence is to bring more Federal regulation or
rulemaking to this very private matter.
On the contrary, we envision a minimal Federal role under which local
community organizations, both public and private, nonprofit voluntary agencies,
will be able to call upon the vast resources of existing Government programs
in a coordinated, useful fashion. Also, of course, the participation of individuals
or families in any federally funded domestic violence programs would be totally
voluntary.
It seems to me that whatever the committee and the Congress decide to do re-
garding domestic violence, we should help local communities continue the in-
novation and the initiative already begun. This is. a newly emerging issue which
we are just beginning to understand, and we cannot presume that we have all
the answers here at the Federal level.
I also think it is important to make the point that domestic violence does not
occur in a vacuum. Many families troubled by violence at home also have serious
problems in other areas, such as juvenile delinquency or runaway children,
drug abuse or alcoholism, unemployment, mental illness, poor health, or in-
adequate education and employment. As a result, it is critical that any Fed-
eral response coordinate existing Government efforts in these areas so that
victims of family violence have access to a wide range of needed services.
It has been very gratifying to see the growing public and congressional in-
terest in the issue of family violence. I would like to take this opportunity to
commend Secretary Califano for establishing this spring an Office on Domestic
Violence at HEW. With a small budget this Office will be organizing the Federal
effort to identify those Federal health and social programs which should be
made more useful to community groups working on domestic violence.
Under its present constitution, the Office on Domestic Violence is limited to
coordinating services and providing information. The bill under consideration at
these hearings proposes to give this Office an additional responsibility, that of
providing small grants to support direct services to families troubled by violence.
Today's hearings will give the subcommittee the opportunity to see the wide
variety of local responses to domestic violence, and we will also hear in
more detail the activities and plans of several Federal agencies.
I look forward to working with the subcommittee, the Federal officials and
with citizens concerned about family violence as we develop an effective and
appropriate Federal role in solving this terrible problem which affects so many
families all over the country.
STATEMENT OP HON. LINDY BOGGS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS PROM THE STATE OP LOUISIANA
Mrs. BOGGS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, members of
the committee, for allowing me to be here. I hope Barbara Mikulski
will be along soon because she. is such a. leader in this regard and has
so much indepth knowledge about the problems and about the solutions
to the problems.
PAGENO="0009"
3
Of course, it is a pleasure to be here and to have you again take up
this legislation for us. It is a bill, of course, that George Miller and
Barbara Mikulski and I have been working on for a long time. I am
sure that I speak for all of our cosponsors-and we now have over
70 of our colleagues with us-when I say that we really deeply ap-
preciate your interest, Mr. Chairman, and the interest of the mem-
bers of this subcommittee in the bill and in the issue. I feel confident
that these hearings will be a springboard for further congressional
act1on.
We have numerous distinguished persons here who will address the
national trends concerning violence in the home, so I will not go into
the areas of their testimony. But I would like to direct my brief re-
marks to the idea of a Federal role in responding to the problem of
family violence.
I share the concern many of our colleagues express over the per-
vasive influence of Government in the personal and business affairs
of our citizens, and therefore in no way do I or any of the cosponsors
envision that the Federal role in assisting victims of family violence is
to bring more Federal regulations or rulemaking into this very private
matter.
On the contrary, we envision a minimal Federal role under which
local community organizations, both public and private, nonprofit
agencies, will be able to call upon the vast resources of existing Govern-
ment programs in a coordinated, useful fashion. Also, of course, the
participation of individuals or families in any federally funded pro-
gram would be totally voluntary.
It seems to me that, whatever the committee and the Congress de-
c.ide to do regarding domestic violence, we should help local com-
munities continue the innovation and the initiative already begun.
`This is a newly emerging issue which we are just beginning to under-
stand, and we cannot presume that we have all the answers here at
the Federal level.
I also think it is important to make the point that domestic violence
does not occur in a vacuum. Many families' troubled by violence at
home also have serious problems in other areas, such as juvenile
delinquency or runaway children, drug abuse, alcoholism, unemploy-
ment, mental illness, poor health, inadequate education, and inade-
quate job opportunities.
As a result, it is critical that any Federal response coordinate ex-
isting Government efforts in these areas so that victims of family
violence have access to a wide range of needed services.
It has been very gratifying to see the growing public and congres-
sional interest in the issue of family violence. I would really like to take
this opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to commend Secretary Califano for
establishing this spring an Office on Domestic Violence at HEW. With
a small budget, this office will be organizing the Federal effort to iden-
hfy those Federal health and social programs which should be made
more useful to community groups working on domestic violence.
Under its present constitution, this Office on Domestic Violence is
limited to coordinating services and providing information. The bill
under consideration at these hearings, proposes to give this Office an
PAGENO="0010"
4
additional responsibility, that of providing small grants to support
direct services to families troubled by violence.
Today's hearings will give the subcommittee the opportunity to see
the wide variety of local responses to domestic violence, and we will
also hear in more detail the activities and plans of several Federal
agencies.
I look forward to working with the subcommittee, the Federal offi-
cials, and with all the citizens concerned about family violence as we
develop an effective and appropriate Federal role in solving this ter-
rible problem which affects so many families all over the country.
I thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, for allowing me to say so.
Mr. SIMoN. Thank you very, very much.
I would have one `brief question. Anytime we move into any area,
whether it is school lunches or you name it, there are those who say
this is a responsibility for State and local governments, that the Fed-
eral Government should not get involved. How do you respond to that
particular comment?
Mrs. BOGGS. I think the Federal Government has an obligation to
meet a national problem by helping to coordinate existing programs.
The Federal Government is already in, out in the field in the area of
health, drug abuse, runaway children, and so on, in the field of delin-
quency, in the law enforcement agencies and across the board in health
and education and social services.
The agencies are there. They need coordination to help families who
have particular types of trouble. And also I think the Federal Gov-
ernment has a responsibility for helping to provide the technical as-
sistance and whatever other small assistance that the local groups, the
community groups, the State and local public agencies, as well as the
private nonprofit agencies, are already using `to meet the problem with-
in their own communities.
It is almost impossible for them to do it alone, and they need a co-
ordinating agency for the other Federal programs that are already in
the field.
Mr. SnI0N. Thank you.
Mr. Beard?
Mr. BEATw. I agree, basically, with what you said about the Federal
responsibility. I think for too long we ,have allowed this issue to
flounder around, and I think it is to the credit of the chairman, Chair-
man Simon, and certainly since George has been in the Congress,
George Miller, that this issue has remained alive. We hopefully will
ha~e some meaningful legislation that will come forward.
I think, too-and again, this is a domestic issue for this country-
that people's biggest complaint, the taxpayers, is that money is always
going elsewhere overseas to everyone and his uncle, but not for pro-
grams here to take care of our own people who are sometimes neglected.
I think we have an opportunity here to do something.
Mrs. Boocs. Thank you, Mr. Beard.
Mr. SIMoN. The man I referred to earlier who `is now here, Mr.
Miller.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Lindy, I am sorry I walked in late in your testimony, but I want
to thank you for coming this morning. I also want to thank you be-
cause I do not believe that without your support, your staff's `help
PAGENO="0011"
5
and your help in writing the legislation, we would be here. Although
it seems we are not terribly far along, we are a lot further along than
we had thought when we set out on this road. Your support in going
around talking to other Members of Congress to try to get them to
support this effort, at a time when social legislation is not in vogue,
has meant a great deal to me and, I am sure, to the other coauthors of
the legislation.
We appreciate your taking your time and all of the effort you have
made on this behalf. I also can thank you on the other end of the
spectrum, in child abuse. The other day on the floor, your statements
clearly persuaded a significant number of people who were not sure
that that was a real issue. We got that appropriation. So I plead
with you to stay involved. Thank you so much.
Mrs. BOGGS. Thank you so much for all of your work, George. You
know I will stay involved. I have not yet ridden the paddy wagons,
as you have, but I may even do that.
Mr. SmioN. Mr. Erdahl?
Mr. ERDAHL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I just want to thank Mrs. Boggs for being with us this morning
and for the leadership she exerts in this area which affects far too
many families in our society.
Mrs. BOGGS. Thank you.
Mr. SIMoN. Thank you very, very much for your appearance and.
your leadership.
Mrs. BOGGS. Thank you.
Mr. SnI0N. Our next witness and another colleague, a new col--
league from New York, Representative Geraldine Ferraro.
STATEMENT OP HON. GERALDINE ]?ERRARO, A REPRESENTATIVE
IN CONGRESS PItOM THE STATE OP NEW YORK
Ms. FERRARO. Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you and the
subcommittee for affording me this opportunity to testify before you
this morning on the subject of domestic violence.
Rather than reiterate the specifics of the pending bill, I would like
to focus on the need for this type of legislation.
Before I decided the people of the Ninth Congressional District
could settle for no less than my representing them down here in
Washington, I worked as a prosecutor in New York City. I created
a unit in the district attorney's office in Queens County called the
special victims bureau, and I served as its chief. I called it the
special victims bureau because it handled the people who came into
the system most traumatized by criminal offenses.
We attempted to carry them vertically through each step with the
same attorney handling the case and eliminating the delays and un-
necessary anxieties which surround a criminal justice system as large
as ours.
Among our victims were women and children who had been physi-
cally and sexually abused both within and without the home. It is,
of course, the former which I will address today.
Peithaps before doing so, however, I should give you a little his-~
torical background to explain how cases of domestic violence are
PAGENO="0012"
6
handled in New York City. Family court, in the role of parens
patriae, assumes jurisdiction over all matters involving members of
the same family. It is the court of original jurisdiction over all mat-
ters involving members of the same family. It is the court of original
jurisdiction in all cases of physical child abuse, as distinguished
from sexual. It is only after hearings and a judicial finding of severe
abuse that the matter is referred to criminal court for prosecution
under the assault statutes. And so it should be.
If the primary purpose of our system is to protect the child, then
placement in a substitute care facility pending determination of the
charge makes sense. Providing the parent with counseling toward the
goal of returning the child to a family unit also makes sense. It is
considered a civil proceeding with much relaxed rules of evidence
and, I would hasten to add, with much greater chance of success.
Until September 1977, that was the rule when a spouse or other
relative was the victim of assault by a family member, but unfor-
tunately, it didn't work as well. Women who had been beaten could
only go to family court because, as I mentioned earlier, it was the
court of original jurisdiction and because marriage seemed a sacro-
sanct union that the authorities were loathe to disrupt. It is interest-
ing to note that New York, which does not recognize common law mar-
riage, gave greater protection to a woman who was living with a man
than it gave to a legally married woman.
Unlike the child who could be removed from the premises of the
abuser and placed in foster care, the wife had no such choice. She
would go to the family court, wait in what is known as intake, and
request an order of protection pending a hearing. The speed with
which she got that order and an appointment before a judge depend-
ed upon how badly beaten she was when she appeared before the in-
take officer.
If her bruises were not either visible or serious in the opinion of
the person viewing her, she could wait as long as 2 weeks to see a
judge and get an order.
All of that changed in 1977 when New York State passed legisla-
tion giving a woman the right to choose either family court or crimi-
nal court. But once that choice is made, it is a final decision. She can't
have both.
There we were, an office processing 40,000 arrests annually. and
now we were getting into family matters. If it was a misdemeanor,
we gave the woman a summons returnable on a day that was con-
venient for her to get a sitter for her children. We armed her with an
order of protection and told her to serve her husband or have a
friend serve him with the summons.
Let me clarify that assault in the third degree can be serious in-
jury. But in order for it to be a felony assault in New York, which
raises it to assault second, there must be either the use of a weapon
or disfigurement or permanent physical injury. So a black eye, a few
stitches, or even a broken nose may not fit the designation of a
felony.
Many times, as the court officer handed a. battered wife a summons
and order of protection, she would look at me in disbelief, tears
PAGENO="0013"
streaming down her face, and would ask, "Where can I go? He'll kill
me if I go home."
The advantage a woman had in coming to us was that we gave
them immediate service with the order. The disadvantage was that
a criminal action had begun, and the burden of proof was really
quite different.
Perhaps the fears that these women had were unfounded. In all the
cases I handled, not one woman received injury upon serving the
summons. Nonetheless, in their minds the fears were real. I don't
know whether after serving the summons they ever went back into the
house between their court appearances.
Queens County has the dubious distinction of having the highest
incidence of intrafamilial abuse in the city, but we have no shelters.
The other counties had a few, but they were impossible to get into. And
again, I was the prosecutor. My training is in criminal justice, not
psychological counseling. 1~\Te just did not have either the facilities or
the ability to give the professional counseling or to find adequate help
for thesewomen.
YOU may say: Surely she had a parent who would take her, or a
friend. I hasten to point out that the women who show up in criminal
court have reached the end of their line. There was no place else to go.
Most turn to the courts, not as the first alternative, but as a last resort.
I would also like to stress the fact that for many of these women, there
would be a long wait before they felt safe in returning home. And
returning home, believe it or not, is what they want. These women
know that divorce and separate homes are an impossible dream,
something they can't afford.
As a former prosecutor who faced these women every day, the Miller-
Boggs-Mikulski bill pending before the subcommittee has my full
support. The legislation addresses this issue by providing funds for
shelters and for direct aid to the victims and their dependents. It is
designed to give the highest consideration to the discretion of the
community. It provides a limited Federal role, but at the same time
it would give, for the first time, a Federal commitment. The commit-
ment would mean a great deal to the people on the local level who deal
face to face with the problem of domestic violence.
Domestic violence is not a new phenomenon, nor is it a figment of
the feminist imagination. We have all seen pictures of macho cavemen
dragging their woman by the hair into caves of connubial bliss. Our
problem is that since that time, we have insisted that what went on in
that cave was a personal matter between husband and wife, parent and
child. The subjects were seen as inappropriate for Government inter-
vention-we had no right to enter that cave. I hope that we would all
agree that the days of women and children being chattels are gone
forever.
I would also hope that the days of reluctance on the part of Govern-
ment to get involved in these matters is also passiiig. Support. for loca~1
services to aid the victims of domestic violence would not be an exces-
sive intrusion into the sacred marriage relationship. It wouldn't be n
sign of the demise of the American family.
In fact, this legislation can be pointed to as a force which will
strengthen these families because it provides aid when the marriage is
PAGENO="0014"
8
floundering. It is also, in my opinion, a cost-effectiv~ approach to the
problem. Divorce and alimony and child support are really luxuries
that can be accomplished only by those who can afford that status.
Abandonment and welfare rolls are the alternative for those who can't.
There is another phase of domestic violence which I would like to
briefly address. Our society recognizes the plight of the abused child
and the battered spouse. But there is another victim who is just now
emerging on the national scene. There is, unfortunately, a whole new
pattern of behavior which is evolving in families without father figures
and with grandparents who move in to share expenses.
Last year, a case came into my bureau of a 65-year-old grandmother
who had been struck several times by her 16-year-old grandson. After
talking to the complainant and her daughter, who was the defendant's
mother, for about 20 minutes, I decided the kid couldn't be all bad
because these two were off the wall. Then I met the kid-gorgeous
~but rotten. His father was in jail serving 20 years for a sodomy con-
~viction. His mother was a weak willed, not too bright giggler who was
dominated by her mother, who was providing support for her and
Iher two sons.
What to do? The grandmother wanted the young man locked up
~for life. The mother didn't want him at home. He was too old and too
difficult to be placed in foster care. His lawyer pleaded him guilty and
he got 30 days. The boy needed counseling. He needed a temporary
shelter. But we had nothing to give him. That young man has fallen
between the cracks.
I was the one who should have worried the least about him. but I
considered him my failure and society's. He too is a victim, just as
the battered wife is. I know he had nowhere to go but down.
Perhaps the subcommittee can rectify this hopeless situation for
future young men through your action on domestic violence legisla-
tion. Remember, it was counseling he really needed. Again, I hasten to
point out that this is not an unusual situation. It is, however, just
beginning to come to our attention. I would suggest that when the
bill is marked up, that it doesn't include an age definition. The indica-
tion, unfortunately, is that domestic violence can be committed by
minors.
You would imagine that my experiences in the D.A.'s office would
have left me jaded and cynical. But they haven't. Instead, my dealings
with special victims have left their scars. If I sit and dwell upon the
stories that were told to me, I would probably end up in tears. and
I am not a weepy woman. My campaign slogan was "Finally-a tough
Democrat." It was chosen because I was a tough prosecutor.
What I am trying to share with you is the fright, the fear, the
hopelessness of situations that you and I cannot imagine. But situa-
tions which become everyday events from which many in our society
cannot escape. The domestic violence legislation pending before this
subcommittee is a first but tiny step in the right direction.
The subcommittee has before it the opportunity to make, at very
little cost, a great deal of difference in the lives of millions of Amen-
can families. As a sitting Member of Congress and as a former prose-
eu~tor who dealt with some of those tragic cases, I ask you not to let
thisdhance, the last chance for many families, slip by us.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
PAGENO="0015"
9
Mr. SIMoN. We thank you for your practical insights into this mat-
ter. I have no questions.
Mr. Beard?
Mr. BEARD. [Nods negatively.] She said it all.
Mr. SmioN. Mr. Kramer?
Mr. KRAMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
We welcome you not only as a fellow member but as my neighbor.
I am sorry and apologize that I was not here to hear the first few
minutes of your testimony. Perhaps you covered this, as I have not
yet had a chance to read your statement. However, can you tell me
what you envision the Federal role to be in helping to alleviate the
problems you have posed?
Ms. FERRARO. I think what this piece of legislation does, which is
give money to the States so that they can provide facilities, shelters,
counseling, without a tremendous amount of Federal intervention, is
the right direction to go in. The agencies that deal with these problems
are not equipped to handle them. For instance, the district attorney's
office, had we had the funds to provide a psychologist to deal with
these people as they came in, it would have made a tremendous differ-
ence in their lives and in our ability to handle the cases.
I do see the Government as recognizing the problem and as moving
in a first step toward assisting the local governments to administer
programs.
Mr. KRAMER. Do we have time for a followup question?
Mr. SmI0N. Yes.
Mr. KRAMER. I grant you that most of these people, from my own
experience, often have nowhere to turn and nowhere to go. But ulti-
mately, do you see these shelters as really being a way in which to pro-
vide something other than just intermediate relief? In other words,
aren't we really going to be dealing with an ultimate situation in
which a battered woman is still going to be ultimately faced with the
problem of returning to her home or ultimately leaving her family
setting as she knows it?
In most cases the shelter will provide a temporary sanctuary for
her during periods of the greatest abuse, but it will not be a solution
to the woman's home problems. Do you agree or disagree with that?
Ms. FERRARO. I do. I don't see the shelters as being a permanent
place where a woman will go to get away from her home situation,
but there is a definite need for a temporary spot. I will give you an-
other example. I had a young woman come in to me who had a child
who was about 4 months old. We were all playing house with the baby,
feeding it. She had another child who was 2 years old. Having had
three children, let me tell you, this 2-year-old was the best behaved kid
I had ever seen. He was just terrific.
They were around the courthouse all day while we were going
through the process of getting the summons, the court order, and all
of the rest of that stuff under control. It came time for her to leave.
She didn't have anyplace to go, and because :her parents had disowned
her when she married this guy-it was a mixed marriage-and she
had no money, what ended up happening was we took a collection with
the detectives and people working in the office, and we each put in a
dollar to give her money to get to a friend's house.
PAGENO="0016"
10
The point is she had no temporary spot to go except the friend, who
had to take in, at this point, a 4-month-old baby and a 2-year-old child
as well. Now, friends can be patient, but they are not patient that long.
If you don't have family, it is a real problem. \~\There is she going to
go after a day or two of this friend's kindness? I don't know.
But if we had a temporary shelter for her to move into, enough time
for her to have her husband appear in court, enough time for them to
get some sort of meeting or agreement with reference to support or
with reference to where they were going to go, whether it was coun-
seling or divorce, that temporary shelter would be a first step, hut it
is a necessary first step, for her to pull her life together.
You cannot imagine what desperation is when these women say to
you, "I have nowhere to go, and if I go home lie will kill me." Shelters
are just a first step; I keep repeating that, but it is really important.
They have nowhere else to go.
But, I do not see it as a permanent solution to a situation.
Mr. KRAMER. Thank you.
Mr. SIMON. Mr. Miller?
Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Geraldine, given your very direct and tough statement today and
your very moving statement the other day on rape, I think I am going
to enjoy your service in Congress far more than I had anticipated. It is
somewhat lonely around here on some of these subjects.
[Applause.]
Mr. MILLER. Let me ask you something. You make a point in your
statement, and I think you have the direct experience to amplify on it
if you just take a moment, because I think some people may not under-
stand, or the record should at least be built, that by the time a woman
has come to you to file charges to go through the court procedures-
could you just describe what she has gone through before she made
that decision?
I mean, you say there is no place else to go. Most turn to the courts,
not as a first alternative, but as a last resort.
Ms. FERRARO. Again, I could sit here and give you examples all day
of situations that happened. Going back a little bit to the historical
background in New York City, when I said it was usually a family
court matter, it had always been. And I told you what we did with mis-
demeanors only. I didn't mention felonies because, as I indicated to
you, a felony required the use of a weapon or disfigurement or per-
manent impairment. When you got to that point, the police were ready
to come in and arrest in most instances.
In one instance I had, a woman's teeth were knocked out, but the
police refused to do anything and they sent her to family court. She
spent an entire morning in family court, because there was such a back-
log-they have intake all day long in family court in New York City.
By the time she got up to the woman, she was told: "You know, you do
have your choice of having him arrested or cOming in here and wait-
ing to see the judge." She said, "Don't have him arrested. because I
am afraid."
She came in to me and I brought her into the courtroom. in to a judge
who was very knowledgeable, but he had been an assistant D.A. in
Manhattan and we were Queens County, so there is always that lit-
tle bit of antagonism between the two. Unfortunately, the woman
PAGENO="0017"
11
turned out being the one who was hurt because he turned around and
said, "I am not going to order an arrest of this guy." lie said, "It is
obviously serious permanent injury, so send her back out and let her
have him arrested."
I was so frustrated that I ordered the guy's arrest, and I didn't really
have the authority to do that without putting my job on the ime. I
did it anyway. Her mouth was a disaster. She had no teeth. She was
bleeding. I sa.id that a woman came to us as a last resort. I know for
certain that was not the first time lie had hit her, but it was the tinie
that was the last straw and she finally came in and said: I have noth-
ing else I can do.
He was arrested but you have a judiciary that looks at the situation
and says, again, it is a husband and wife thing. The wife is always
advised that lie can end up in jail. But, they then tell her that if lie is
working and if lie ends up in jail, she won't get support. So imme-
dia.tely the woman is made to feel guilty for having started this action.
I find that it is tremendous frustration on the part of the victims
and tremendous frustration felt by the system-both the criminal jus-
tice system and the family court system. Again, I don't know how it
works outside New York, but I know how it is in New York City. And
I feel that in an instance like this; we have got to provide some means
of assistance to her and some means of assistance especially when she
has children.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you.
Mr. SIMON. Mr. Erdahi.
Mr. EImARL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to thank you for your perceptive and knowledgeable testi-
mony. Your last exchange with Mr. Miller brings to mind a question.
WTe often hear that while these situations may conic in to the court, very
few of these abusers ever end up in jail. Could you elaborate a bit?
What has been the success-and I am not trying to single you out, but
obviously you have, the experience as a prosecutor-of really getting
these people who are guilty of crime actually being penalized or sent
to prison?
Mr. FERRARO. I will give you a little bit of background on my experi-
ence with the defendants who came in. In most instances they were
not people with prior criminal records. They took out their anxieties
or whatever on their wives, in the sanctity of their homes. Many of
them were people who were considered stalwart people in our society.
We had many police officers and firemen, as well as others, who came
within the system. So there is no specific type of person who commits
an assault on his wife. But there is a specific type of person who can-
not escape from that assault, and that is one who cannot afford a
divorce.
The success rate for us depends upon how you measure success rates.
If you measure success rates with a plea by the man to harassment.
where he gets a conditional discharge and the conditional discharge
is that lie seeks psychological counseling and is on probation for a cer-
tam. period of tirne~ then~ we were very successful. And I think that
is really the direction we must go in, toward counseling.
If it is success rate measured by time in jail, no, we were not. The
men rarely received prison time on conviction. They rarely went to
49-914-79------2
PAGENO="0018"
12
trial unless it was a really serious thing, stabbing as a part of the as-
sault and things like that.
We always got a plea and it was to a lesser charge. The reason we
did that is if it is difficult to get the Federal Government to come in
and give money for assistance, it is twice as difficult to get jurors to
convict a man for belting his wife.
Mr. ERDAHL. Thank you very much.
Mr. SIMON. Mr. Stack.
Mr. STACK. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to commend the distinguished member from New York
for a very effective portrayal of the problem. And just as she has had
experience on a practical basis with this problem, I too had ample
experience as a county sheriff of a county in Florida with a popula-
tion of 1 million people.
We found that domestic violence, or domestics, as we referred to
them in the profession, was one of our major concerns. The typical
scene would be a Friday night when either momma, poppa. or both got
into the sauce and went to work on each other. At that point, the first
contact with social agencies would be the police. Someone would, call
the police.
Many people may not be aware of this, but this is the most danger-
ous situation which confronts a police officer. There are more police
officers either killed or injured in dealing with domestic violence than
in any other area. A great deal of work has been done on this by Pro-
fessor Bard of the University of the City of New York. You may know
Professor Bard. I brought him down to our county to teach our men
how to approach these situations to minimize the danger.
Of course, what we are dealing with, as you so well point out, is a
deep-rooted socioeconomic problem, and it is not one we are going to
resolve simply by sending people to jail. It is much deeper than that.
We need, of course, temporary shelters. We have them in my county
to an extent, but unfortunately, there is an absence of local funding to
meet the problem appropriately.
We have a program called women in distress which does provide
temporary shelters for women such as you have described. But we
need to go beyond this. We need, certainly, counseling of all involved.
Certainly counseling of all involved is very much a problem. The fact
is it is intimately related to the problem of child abuse, which is a
growing problem in our Nation. These two are very much interrelated.
I would say that I think this committee is doing a great service in
calling this matter to public attention. I think the legislation proposed
certainly will help to deal with the problem. It is an area in which we
need help.
The appropriate Federal role is, in my view, to provide the requisite
dollars so that we can have shelters as needed, and also counseling to
deal with the essence of the problem. Beyond that, of course, the ulti-
mate solution lies in a better educational system, which in turn will
provide people with a better stake in the economy.
This has to be our overall goal, but these things are going to take
a long time to achieve. I think we are moving in that direction, but in
the interim I think the points tha.t you have made are well taken and
I think it is appropriate for Congress to address them. I commend you
for your testimony.
PAGENO="0019"
13
Ms. FERRARO. Thank you very much.
Mr. SIMoN. Thank you very much for your testimony~
Ms. FERRARO. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SIMON. I note the presence of one of the chief sponsors, Bar-
~bara Mikuiski. If you would care to join us here temporarily before
we call on you as a witness, we would, be pleased to have you join the
subcommittee panel.
Ms. MixlmsKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My heart, mind and feet
~welcome that suggestion. [Laughter.]
Ms. MIEITLSKI. I would like to yield, if I could, to Congressmen
Barnes and Hyde, who I know have other business, and then perhaps
I could be the wrap-up speaker.
Mr. SIMON. Right. If we could have both of them come to the table
and make their brief statements, then we can ask questions.
I noted our colleague from Pennsylvania, Representative Bob
Edgar, was here temporarily and apparently had to leave, but he did
show up to indicate the support of the legislation.
Not in order of seniority but in order of appearance here, I will
first call on the new member, Representative Mike Barnes.
~STATEMENT OP HON. MICHAEL B. BARNES, A REPRESENTATIVE
IN CONGRESS PROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND, ACCOMPANIED
BY CYNTHIA ANDERSON AND LISE MOULTON
Mr. BARNES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In order to expedite the hearing, I will not read my entire testi-
mony but would request that it be inserted in the record.
Mr. SIMON. It will be entered in the record.
[The prepared testimony of Hon. Michael D. Barnes follows:]
TESTIMONY OF HON. MICHAEL D. BARNES
Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you and mem-
bers of the Subcommittee on Select Education today. I am very pleased to have
with me two persons from my own Congressional District of Montgomery County,
Md., who are very familiar with the field of domestic violence, and who work
on a daily basis with the victims of domestic violence.
I would like to introduce them to you at this time.
Cynthia Anderson has been the Coordinator of the Montgomery County
Abused Persons Program since its inception in 1977. She was instrumental in
* establishing this program and is a pioneer and a highly-respected authority in
the field of domestic violence. Those of you who served on this Subcommittee
in the 95th Congress will perhaps remember hearing from Ms. Anderson when
she testified on this subject in March, 1978.
I am also pleased to have with me Ms. Lise Moulton, who is a social worker
and a full-time member of the staff of the Abused Persons Program in Mont-
gomery County. Ms. Moulton is also here representing the National Coalition
Against Domestic Violence which, as you know, is coordinating the efforts on
behalf of HR. 2977 and other legislative initiatives in this area.
Both Ms. Anderson and Ms. Moulton are available to answer any questions
you may want to ask them regarding Montgomery County's program. In their
* work with the victims of domestic violence every day, they see the shocking
physical abuse, the desperation, and the human tragedy; but they also witness
the changed courses of victims' lives that bring an end to their suffering; they
witness hope; they witness the positive first step out of the violence and sometimes
even the permanent change in the behavior of an abusive spouse that saves a mar-
riage and a family. These things can result from a compassionate, constructive and
* comprehensive program.
PAGENO="0020"
14
The Abused Persons Program in Montgomery County is one in which we on
the local level take a great deal of pride and one which I would not hesitate to
hold up as a model for programs throughout the nation. On that note, I would
like to call your attention to a letter dated July 2, addressed to Chairmam
Simon, from Dr. Ellen Weber Libby, who chairs the Community Crisis Center
Citizens Advisory Committee in Montgomery County. I am told that all members
of the Subcommittee received a copy of this letter, but, if you have been out of
your office a few days, you may not have yet seen it. The letter is an expression of
support for H.R. 2977 and is also an invitation to you to tour the community
shelter in nearby Bethesda and to speak personally with the residents and
staff who participate in the Abused Persons Program.
I myself have done this and can say from a very personal standpoint that I
was moved by the experience, that I learned from it, and that I came away
comforted that such a shelter and such a program exist in my own community..
I came away determined to do whatever possible as a Member of Congress t~
see that this and other shelters can exist to aid the persons who need them.
When Cynthia Anderson testified before you one year ago, she very aptly de-
scribed our community and its need with respect to this problem, and I would
like to quote from her testimony:
"Our county represents a largely affluent urban population, neighbor to the
Nation's Capital. . . and home to many government officials and industry ex-
ecutives. Though the availability of human services in our county is high com-
pared to many areas, the coordination of the needs of battered women and their
children is often complex, very time-consuming, and basic needs such as alter~
nate housing are frequently unavailable to women without good earning
capacity."
In an average month the Montgomery County Program, which at this time
is funded through the County Department of Health. receives 100 crisis calls
over the Hotline, offers shelter to at least 65 persons-both women and their
children-and will at any given time be servicing between 60 and SO clients-
services that include shelter for up to three weeks, information and referral
either by phone or face-to-face, legal advice, counseling, support groups, financial
assistance, emergency medical services. chilclcare. even employment assistance-
to name a few. Where the abusive spouse is willing, individual or group marital
counseling is offered to work on permanent behavioral changes.
While domestic violence, and more specifically spouse abuse. is certainly
nothing new to our society, what is relatively new is our w-iilingness to bring this
problem out into the open, to examine it, to study the victims, the abusers. the
causes, the results. Such studies, plus abundant demonstrations of need, have
fortunately spawned action programs in many communities across the country.
I hope that the Congress this year will recognize the validity and the need of
such programs and will offer Federal support and leadership to augment and
stabilize what is being done at the local level.
I w-ould offer one word of caution-which in today's climate might seem unnec-
essary-let us not create new- layers of bureaucratic red tape that ensnarl the
federal monies to the point that after the slow trickle-down process. through all
the federal and state administrative w-ickets, nothing remains for the safe
secure shelter of a woman and her children who might flee their home in the
middle of the night. These are the victims, and they need help-immediate,
compassionate, no-questions-asked help.
I support H.R. 2977 because I know it was written in this spirit and I know
from reading last ~ hearing record how eloquently witnesses like Barbara
Mikulski and Lindy Boggs reiterated this point time and again.
HR. 2977 w-ould direct a full 75 percent of the appropriated funds to commu-
nity-based programs and local public agencies. This would, hopefully, mean a
relatively direct and uncomplicated route for the Federal funds to reach and
benefit the individual victim. Established, well-run programs already in exist-
ence-such as that in Montgomery County-would be eligible for such a grant
and could go right on operating as they do now. New programs could be estab-
lished and receive the federal monies necessary to get off the ground.
The grant process in HR. 297T will hopefully allow- the flexibility necessary to
apply exactly the right approach. to the particular community and its particular
needs.
The remaining 25 percent of the money would go toward long-term state plan-
ning for citizen participation, a national information clearinghouse, educational
media, and the coordination of the programs at the federal level.
PAGENO="0021"
15
As with almost every other problem we face, this one must he confronted
`-through a combined Federal, State and local effort. Many localities and many
States are already working; I believe it is time for the Federal Government to
join the team. I commend you, Mr. Chairman, for holding these important hear-
ings this week and I urge you and Members of the Subcommittee to act as
quickly as possible to bring this bill out of the subcommittee and the full com-
mittee. I offer my assistance to you in any way possible.
Thank you again for allowing me this chance to appear before you.
Mr. BARNES. Thank you.
I appreciate very much the opportunity to appear before you this
morning. I am particularly pleased to have with me two individuals
from my own congressional district in Montgomery County, Md., who
are very familiar with the field of domestic violence and who work on
~a daily basis with the victims of domestic violence.
I would like to introduce to the subcommittee at this time Cynthia
Anderson, who has been the coordinator of the Montgomery County
abused persons program since its inception in 1977. She was instru-
mental in establishing this program and is a pioneer and, I know it is
fair to say, a highly respected authority in the field of domestic vio-
lence. Those of you who served on this subcommittee in the 95th Con-
gress will recall hearing from Ms. Anderson when she testified on the
subject in March of 1978.
I am also pleased to have with me Ms. Lise Moulton, who is a social
worker and full-time member of the staff of abused persons program
in Montgomery County. Ms. `Moulton is also a representative of the
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, which, as you know,
is coordinating the efforts on behalf of 1-I.E. 2977 and other legislative
initiatives in this area.
Both Ms. Anderson and Ms. Moulton are available to answer any
questions you may want to ask them regarding Montgomery County's
program. In their work with the victims of domestic violence every
day, they see the shocking physical abuse, the desperation and human
tragedy; but they also witness the changed courses of victims lives
that bring an end to their suffering. They witness hope. They witness
the positive first step out of the violence and sometimes even the per-
manent change in the behavior of an abusive spouse that saves a mar-
ima~e and saves a family.
These things can result from a compassionate, constructive, and
comprehensive program. The abused persons program in Montgomery
County is one in which we on the local level take a great deal of pride
and one which I would not hesitate to hold up as a model for programs
throughout the Nation.
On that note, I would like to call to your attention a letter dated
-July 2, addressed to Chairman Simon, from Dr. Ellen IVeber Libby,
who chairs the Conen-munity Crisis Center Citizens Advisory Commit-
tee m Montgomery County. I am told that all members of the subcorn-
mittee received a copy of this letter, hut if you have been out of your
office a few days, as I have, you may not yet have seen it.
The letter is an expression of support for H.1I. 2977 and it is also
an invitation to you to tour the community shelter in nearby Bethesda,
Md.. and to speak personally witJi the residents and staff who partici-
Fate in the abused persons program.
I myself have done this and can say from a very personal stand-
point that I was moved by the experience, that I learned from it, and
PAGENO="0022"
16
that I came away comforted that such a shelter and such a program
exist in my own community. I came away determined to `do whatever
possible as a Member of Congress to see that this and other shelters.
can exist to aid the persons who need them.
In an average month the Montgomery County program, which a.t
this time is funded through the county department of health, receives
100 crisis calls over the hotline, offers shelter to at least 65 persons,
both women and children, and will at any given time be servicing
between 60 and 80 clients, services that include shelter for up to 3
weeks, informatin and referral either by phone or face-to-face, legal
advice, counseling, support groups, financial assistance, emergency~
medical services, child care, even employment assistance, to name a
few. Where the abusive spouse is willing, individual or group marital
counseling is offered to work on permanent behavioral cha.nges.
As with almost every other problem we face. this one must be con-
fronted ultimately with a combined Federal, State, and local effort..
Many localities a.nd many States are already working. I believe it is
time for the Federal Government to join that team.
I commend you, Mr. Ohairman. and the leadership of the members
of this subcommittee for holding these important hearings this week.
I urge you to act as quickly as possible to bring this bill out of sub-
committee, out of full committee. I am proud to be a. cosponsor of the
legislation and I certainly offer you any assistance I can provide as
we move this bill through the legislative process.
I thank you again for allowing me and my two experts from Mont-~
gomery County to appear before the committee this morning.
Mr. SmroN. Thank you.
We will hear from Mr. Hyde and then we will ask questions. MT
colleague from Illinois, Henry Hyde.
STATEMENT OF HON. HENRY 3~. HYDE, A REPRESENTATIVE IN'
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OP ILLINOIS
Mr. Himu. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I deeply appreciate Congresswoman Mik'nlski giving us her time.
I have a very brief statement to make, which I will ask leave to be'
included in the record.
Mr. SnroN. It will be entered into the record.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Henry J. Hyde follows:]
STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE HENRY J. HYDE
Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, I greatly appreciate the'
opportunity to appear before you today to express my strong support for H.R.
2977, the Domestic Violence Prevention and Services Act.
As one who `supported this legislation in the last Congress, and as a cosponsor
in this Congress, I am firmly convinced of it merits.
In these times of rapidly-mounting inflation, amid strong calls for reduced'
Federal spending, I would not normally call for the creation of another, new
Federal program.
The Domestic Violence Prevention and Services Act is an exception. This pro--
gram is simply an initiative to encouiage local units of governments and others
to address one of the most immediate and personally tragic problems confronting
society. In the case of victims of crime compensation, it is true that there may
be other sources of reimbursement for medical bills-but where a family has
been torn asunder by domestic violence, the need is for prompt and specialized
PAGENO="0023"
17
attention that can best be supplied by a specific program so directed. This legis-
lation is a modest attempt to stimulate local organizations to move in this
direction.
It is clear that the supporters of this measure do not intend to involve the
Federal Government in long-term Federal funding. Safeguards are built into the
legislation stipulating that Federal funds cannot be used for more than 25 percent
of a community-based program. An applicant cannot receive Federal funds for
more than 3 years, and funds will not go directly to an individual.
What the legislation proposes, and the reason for my strong support, is to
provide leadership to local communi'ties-initiative----a clearinghouse for
information.
There is no requirement that a State or community participate in the shelter
program. There is' nothing compulsory about it.
Domestic violence is increasing throughout the country--it cuts across income
and educational lines-striking out at mothers, fathers, children, grandparents,
sisters, and brothers. The reasons are as' varied as the victims.
The Federal Government cannot and should not attempt to solve a domestic
abuse situation, but we can provide a small amount of funds to help provide a
place to go to get one's wounds bound up, to get shelter, and some consolation and
counseling for a problem for which facilities are woefully lacking `at this time.
If the Government Printing Office can provide booklets on such things as
"Imaginative Ways with Bathrooms," "Dried Flower Arrangements," and "Keep-
ing Your Pet Healthy," surely we can show a little direction to communities in
how to deal with domestic violence. If we can fund the arts and humanities, we
can show a little leadership in this area as well.
The gentleman from California, Mr. Miller, said that this legislation repre-
sents an "investment in the American family." I wholeheartedly agree with you,
and urge that H.R. 2977 be reported to the House at the earliest possible date.
Mr. HYDE. In these times of austerity, budget cutting, and proposi-
tion 13 atmosphere, it is a good idea for a prudent Congressman not to~
urge any new programs; take a look at the ones that exist and maybe
cut them down or eliminate them. Such an idea occurred to me on
victims of crime compensation, something which I supported in the
last C'ongress. But there are other areas that can fill that need, other'
programs to help reimburse victims for their medical bills.
But this particular need is unique. The domestic violence situation
requires a program specifically tailored for immediacy and for spe-
cialized expert counseling an'd care. This program is simply a nudge'
to local units of government, to local organizati'ons to get into this
field to provide a place where immediate counseling, immediate shelter,,
and the specialized attention that the battered spouse and the battered
children need is available.
Montgomery County obviously has an exceptionally fine program.
There are many areas that do not. There are many areas where a
woman has no place to turn and must get some specialized counseling
to avoid a situation that could result in even worse crimes being com-
mitted, in somebody being killed, in children's lives being ruined.
So the need is there.
Now, why should the Federal Government get into this? If you
look at this bill, it is as modest as any program could possibly be.
Twenty-five `percent is all that this program proposes to put into a
local operation, a community-based program, and then it cannot last
for more than 3 years, and the funds are not going to get to any
individual.
Now, it just seems to me that if the Government Printing Office can
provide booklets on such interesting titles as "Imaginative Ways With
Bathrooms," "Dried Flower Arrangements," and "Keeping Your Pet
Healthy," if Congress can spend money repairing the roof on the
PAGENO="0024"
18
Kennedy Center, then we can show a little direction to communities
on how to deal with domestic violence.
There is a tremendous need for this program. The Federal Govern-
ment often before in history has shown the way to local governments,
to local groups. Here is a way for the expertise, the tecirnical knowl-
edge and a modest amount of funding to encourage local govermnents
to get into a program where a need exists. Once these programs are
ongoing, the Federal Government can gracefully withdraw, having
encouraged and having helped found what I think is a very essen-
tial service.
So this is an exception, I think, to our need to cut down on new
programs. This is simply encouraging local units to start their own
program. The financial involvement is minimal. The good to come
from it is beyond measure and I heartily support this program and
this legislation.
Mr. SI~roN. Thank you, very much.
May I direct one question to Ms. Anderson and Ms. Moulton?
If you have had a chance to look at the bill itself-
[Ms. Anderson nods affirmatively.]
[Ms. Moulton nods affirmatively.]
Mr. SIMoN. Would it be of practical help in your Montgomery
County situation? We will before too long be marking up the bill.
Would there be any modifications you would suggest to the bill?
Ms. ANDERSON. I think one of the aspects of the bill is that it spe-
cifically states that moneys will be restricted going to some extent into
public programs, and we are a public program that is fully financed
at this time by our county, with one exception that we have CETA-
funded positions for staffing our shelter component.
I anticipated that question and have thought about how we could
respond to that. I think it could be of benefit to us by enhancing our
program. There are certain basic services that we can already provide,
and I think we are a very comprehensive program in basic services.
~ut let me give you one example where I would see applying for a
grant if this bill went into effect.
Clearly, we need to be addressing the needs of the children who
come into our shelter. We have women staying in a shelter, bringing
their children for sometimes as long as 3 weeks. and on sonic occasions
us long as 4 weeks. We are identifying tl~at often these children are
~traumat.ized by the violence they have witnessed between their parents.
At the moment, we have very limited capability, other than offering
recreation tpes of activities, to really intervene in helping these chil-
dren deal with the trauma they have observed.
One of the ways. if this bill went into effect, that I would be inter-
ested in applying for a grant would be to do some very specialized
work with the children who are in our shelter program.
Mr. SmroN. Thank you.
Ms. MOULTON. Let me speak for the National Coalition Against
Domestic Violence, because in Montgomery County we have a very
lucrative county which gives a lot of money to our particular program.
But I would like to speak to all of the shelters across the country who
~are living on nickels and dimes, shoestring and donations. The turn-
away rate in some of these communities is from 200 to 300 women and
children per month.
PAGENO="0025"
19
Their shelter is so small that they must turn away families who are
in desperate need. And there are shelter programs in this country at
this time that are closing because the women who have devoted them-
selves, either doing volunteer work or who are terribly underpaid and,
of course, understaffed, can only sustain this for so long. So may I
speak to the need, the tremendous need of moneys, even the seed money
which this program is, only seed money.
Twenty-five percent of your operating budget, of $50,000, is not
enough to shelter, feed and provide some support services to these
women. So we believe that this is only an effort to involve the com-
munities, but at least some starting money.
Mr. Sn~roN. Thank you.
Mr. Beard.
Mr. BEARD. No questions.
Mr. SIMON. Mr. Kramer.
Mr. KRAMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Can you tell me how successful you have been in terms of providing
large-range solutions to the problems of the people you have served?
In other words, what percentage of cases wind up returning to their
original environment and then experience a repetition of the kind of
activity that brought them to you in the first Place?
Ms. ANDERSON. In helping Congressman Barnes' office prepare some
of the testimony before this committee, we went back and looked at
some of our recent data which we have been keeping in the last 6
months, particularly, and we found that 50 percent of the individual
women who were utilizing the shelter component of our services had
found alternative living arrangements in an independent fashion.
That is to say, they were living independently away from the abusive
situation.
I believe this was out of 23 women in the month of May. We are
speaking now of 23 women who utilized our shelter. Eleven of them
found alternative or independent living arrangements. Three were
still in shelters. So we were not able to determine yet what their status
would be. Four returned home to the husband, the home of origin, two~
of those with change, and we think this is very important. That is to
say, the husband came in, acknowledged the abusive situation. With
the intervention of our counseling staff, the couple went home, coming
back to the center for ongoing marital counseling. We think that is a
tremendous effort.
Mr. KRAMER. How long a period of time are you talking about?
Ms. ANDERSON. I was just using those figures from the period of
May of this year.
Mr. KRAMER. You have been established since 1977, is that correct?
Ms. ANDERSON. We have been operational since January of 1977.
We have .not had a full component of services, however, until about
this time last year. We have been developing right along. We have had
full counseling capacity for about a year now.
* Mr. KRAMER. Have you been tracking those initial people who came
in? In other words, have you been auditing your results from those
initial persons served?
MS. ANDERSON. Doing long-term evaluations?
Mr. KRAMER. Yes.
Ms. ANDERSON. We have been following the cases because they are
in ongoing counseling. We consider counseling as a 6-month period
PAGENO="0026"
20
of time, our average caseload. Lise has more direct experience work-
ing with those families. Would you like to address that, Lise?
Ms. MOULTON. I would also like to say in our program the philo-
sophy is to try to improve family health. We are not a program trying
to help won-len get away as the solution. We feel tha.t the men, the
abusers, need help as much as the family does and the women and
the children.
So our goal is if at all possible we want to involve the abuser to
help him learn better control of his behavior. So we have both the
option of giving the woman an alternative to staying and participating
in the abuse, as either coming to shelter and not going home, or of
making that grand statement to her husband that this is not tolerable
behavior.
We feel that that statement, especially when talking about just tem-
porary removal from the environment, has had a very powerful
impact on the male. Oftentimes these are very entrenched relation-
ships for many years, 10, 20-year relationships of marriage where the
woman has endured the abuse all along. And when she leaves her
home and says I will not tolerate this and I will only come back if
you acknowledge the fact that this is not tolerable behavior, the fact
that there is a whole system that the woman enter that agrees with
:her that this is not tolerable is a statement to the man. We have seen,
frankly, again and again, where the husband has a chance to reassess
what he is doing in his own family to his wife and children, and that
in itself is very powerful, in addition to the fact that we do offer the
counseling services.
I have worked with a number of families which have been able to
stay together and the abuse has stopped through counseling.
Mr. KRAMER. Thank you.
Mr. SIMoN. Mr. Miller.
Mr. MILLER. I would like to thank Congressman Barnes, Ms. Ander-
son and Ms. Moulton for their statements. The last statement may be
the most beneficial statement in terms of the legislation because too
frequently, for those people who have not taken the time to read the
legislation or understand the problem, they assume we are establishing
an underground railroad, if you will, for wives and children to leave
the family.
I think your statement based upon your experience will go a long
way toward showing them that that is not the case; that first of all,
it is unacceptable to leave behind an abuser who may enter into an-
- other marital relationship and continue the activity; but also it is un-
acceptable to see the family, if at all possible to be put back together,
to see it pulled apart at the center.
And I think from my experience in working with this legislation
and working with people in drafting it, many times you will find the
- simple hotline or counseling center, where the wife never leaves the
home but finds out that she is not crazy and she is not the only one
- who is undergoing this, allows her to reassert herself in the family
and change the dynamics of that family and have impact on the fre-
quencv of abuse and the change of dynamics in the family.
So I appreciate very much your testimony. I think that kind of
experience relayed to Members of Congress will cause them to under-
stand that we are not talking about intervention at all; we are talk-
PAGENO="0027"
21
ing about support, we are talking about resources when things have
already gone wrong. I mean what the hell else can go wrong after
they have blown out yOur teeth and knocked out your eyes? That is
intervention.
And I think they will find that this legislation is designed to try
to shore up and call upon some of the strengths of individuals and
family members.
Thank you very much.
Mr. SIMON. Mr. Erdahl.
Mr. ERDAHL. I want to thank the panel but I have no questions.
Mr. SIMON. Mr. Stack.
Mr. STACK. I would like to comment on Mr. Miller's last statement.
There are ways of approaching this which may not have occurred
to him. In my county we have just had a very much-publicized murder
case where, after a period of 20 years of abuse, the woman got her-
self a gun and killed the gentleman in question. That is an ultimate
solution, I may point out. [Laughter.]
Mr. STACK. But not necessarily one to be recommended.
Coming to Congressman Kramer's comment on the success ratio,
success ratios have to be comparable in terms of the particular type
of problem that you encounter in dealing with domestic violence. We
are addressing not only the violence that is encountered upon the
spouse, whether it be the woman or the man. Of course, the abuse of
men by woman has become rather-at least, let me say, we are dis-
covering a great deal more of it. It has probably been going on for
years and we didn't know about it. But women are not the only
victims. Sometimes the men are victims.
But seriously and more importantly, we were also dealing with
child abuse, and obviously, again, the matter of child abuse is one
which is a very deep-seated pyschological problem. Certainly all of
us are aware of the fact that child abusers tend to be children of child
abusers. This chain goes on ad infinitum, as it were, and obviously
we have to get in at some point and break this chain.
I think the same thing is true to a large extent of the domestic
violence between spouses. One of the things that I think you must
have encountered is the importance of drug and alcohol abuse in this
context. That is probably an area where one can demonstrate perhaps
a greater ratio of success. If you are able to get a spouse-abuser into a
treatment program for alcohol or drug abuse, that is an effective way
to go, one which certainly I am sure you have been using; whereas,
the more deep-seated psychological problems are more difficult to deal
with and it is much more difficult to deal with success ratios.
I don't think the recidivism, the return of the woman to your
shelter, is necessarily an index of success. I think it is more important
that we become aware as a nation of the necessity for getting into
this very large area of a social problem of great magnitude. I com-
mend you for going forward. Montgomery County has led the way
in so many social programs, and again here, you are a leader. I ap-
preciate your testimony.
Mr. SmI0N. Ms. Mikulski.
Ms. MIKuLsKI. Mr. Chairman, I have some comments. I would
~Iike to compliment Congressman Barnes for his vigorous activity in
this, and if we could ask Phyllis Schaffley not to talk so loudly-I was
referring to those vibrations through the room. [Laughter.]
PAGENO="0028"
22
I would like to compliment the Congressman on what he is doingS
I am very familiar with the work the Montgomery County people
have been doing. It is truly outstanding.
I would like the committee to take note particularly of the popula-
tion we are talking about when we discuss Montgomery County..
Though not everyone in Montgomery County is rich, it is one of the
most affluent counties in the United States. And very often the myth
surrounding the profile of the domestic violence victim is that he or
she tends to be a person who lives in the inner city, of very poor
background, who is victimized solely because of an economic situa-
tion. I think we can see how broad-based and deep the problem is...
by the depth and breadth of the issues you are dealing with.
So I have no questions.
Mr. SIMoN. Mr. Miller.
Mr. MILLER. If the chairman would yield, I would also like to thank
Congressman Hyde for coming and testifying on this legislation. As
many people in this room know, Congressman Hyde a.nd I have had
many, many differences on a number of issues, but I think his support
of this legislation and his recognition of the very real seriousness
and the magnitude of the problem that has taken place inside the
American home is going to be of great benefit to seeing this legislation
passed.
I think it also speaks well of the kind of coalition that has been
formed behind this legislation, and to a great extent because of Rep-
resentative Mikulski who, many times when I thought I would lay
down and die on this issue, kept prodding me along and saying :
No. no. there is another wayS there is another door. another avenue.
I think to get people like Congressman Hyde and others to recog-
nize t.he seriousness of the problem is a great achievement and hope-
fully will lead to the passage of this legislation.
On a second point, Congressman Stack talked about sort of the ulti-
mate solution. I can remember when I was first considering drafting
this legisi ation and interviewing victims in various shelters around the
countr~, I ke~it raising the issue of spousa.l a.buse in terms of husbands.
And the answer was very often a shrug of the shoulders. I kept trying
to get statistics, and certain people said: IVell, I'm sorry but I just
don't have any commitment. If you want t.o pursue that you can pur-
sue it, but the problem with women is much gTeater.
There was a continual shrugging of the shoulders until one night,
very late, in the District of Columbia, a young woman about 22 or 23
was sever aly battered. I posed the question to her, we were sitting
around, and she very quietly said that I was probably looking in the
wrong place to get my statistics. Naively~ I asked her what she meant,
and she suggested I look in the morgue because she felt when women
make the decision to retaliate, they have got to make sure that it is, in
fact. the final solution beCause of the fear that takes place.
I think that the Congress ought to understand that there is violence
that radiates from the situation that many times is not associated with
it in te.rms of cause but it does in fact take place. You need only read
the papers on Sunday mornings to find out who is shooting who in
America on Saturday night.
So I think as terribleas that sounds, it also points out that hopefully
this legislation will deal with ramifications that spin off the abuse of
spouses in this country.
PAGENO="0029"
23
`Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SIMON. Thank you, Representative Barnes and your two guests
Mr. BARNES. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SIMoN. We now call on one of the dynamic chief sponsors of
this legislation, our colleague from Maryland, Barbara Mikuiski.
STATEMENT OF HON. BARBARA A. MIKULSKI, A REPRESENTA-
TIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MARYLAND
Ms. MIKIJLSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
If I may, I would like to just be able to summarize the remarks.
Mr. SIMON. We will enter your statement in the record and we wel-
come your summary.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Barbara Mikuiski follows:]
TESTIMONY OF CONGRESSWOMAN BARBARA A. MIKIJLSKI
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I thank you for holding these hear-
ings and I appreciate the opportunity to testify. Enactment of legislation to aid
victims of domestic violence is a `top priority for me, as well as for the Congress-
woman's Caucus.
When I began working on this legislation last year, I knew that domestic
violence was a serious problem in American society. As a former child abuse
worker, I have witnessed examples of terrible cruelty within the American
family. From talking with women's groups, I knew that battered wives could be
found in every economic class and social group. I honestly thought I understood
the problem.
But since then, I have learned that the situation is even more serious than I
thought a year ago. Victims of domestic violence are beginning to speak out
publicly. "Respectable" wives are no longer ashamed to admit that they are bat-
tered spouses. Because of my own interest in the subject, women have begun to
share their own private experiences with me-and their experiences are heart-
breaking. Violence in the American home is a quiet epidemic and it is getting
worse as our economIc situation worsens.
American society is today increasingly complex, difficult-and scary. People
are afraid that they won't have enough gas to get to work; or that they will lose
their jobs because the economy is so uncertain. They are worried about whether
they'll be able to pay their home heating bills; and when they go to the grocery
store, they find they can't even afford hamburger anymore. We should not be
surprised that these tensions and frustrations are being taken out at home-at
the expense of anyone who is weaker and/or dependent.
And once violence begins in the home, it escalates dramatically. Once a hus-
band has hit his wife for the firSt time and nothing happens-it is easier to hit
her for the second and third time until severe beatings become a way of life, re-
verberating throughout the entire family. Children who see violence become
batterers themselves, because they have learned that hitting is an acceptable
form of behavior.
One woman told me that she left her husband after eight years of severe
beatings only when she saw her &year-old son beat his 5-year-old sister because
she didn't turn on the TV when he ordered her to. What disturbed `the mother
the most was that her son's face was innocent and self-righteous and her daugh-
ter's wretched with guilt. Neither child thought that she or he had done any-
thing out of the ordinary.
This violence starting in the home has repercussions throughout society. A
recent survey of juvenile offenders indicated that a large percentage of them
had either been victims or witnesses of violence in the home. Children who are
powerless when they are beaten by their parents will retaliate by brutalizing
the old lady next door.
For too long we have refused `to admit that this kind of behavior could really
happen in our idealized American home. Wife beating was soniething to bejoked
about; while the real victims, who knew it wasn't funny, have `been `too ashamed
to, speak out. Police officers did not want to treat domestic violence, as a `crime;
the court system has deliberately made it difficult for women to press charges.
PAGENO="0030"
24
Hospital emergency rooms have ignored the real causes of injury and acceptea
obviously false explanations that let everyone off the hook. Traditional sociab
services were not responsive, because this was a problem that made everyone
uncomfortable.
But the problem was too severe to be ignored forever. Support and help from
battered women has been developed in a variety of community based shelters,
primarily started by volunteers and operating on shoe string budgets, We have
never asked the Air Force to hold a bake sale to build the B-i Bomber; and
we don't think that researchers into esoteric diseases should support their own
laboratories by running thrift shops; but that is the advice we have given to
women trying to save the lives and health of other women. It is time we provided
some short term support-both technical and financial-to enable these local pro-
grams to reach economic self sufficiency. The battered wife who flees her house
in the middle of the night because she is in terror of her life should not have to
worry about whether the shelter will be open this week; or get to the door with
her children to find that the doors have been closed because there was no money
to pay the rent.
A shelter is a place where a woman can catch her breath-both physically
and psychologically, with the help and support of the staff and other women at
the shelter, she realizes that violence is not her fault; and that she doesn't have
to submit to it forever. She can get information about community resources that
are available to her, and what options she has to change.
A shelter is not a place to stay forever-or even for very long. A woman who
has been brutally beaten should not also have to abandon all her belongings, flee
her neighborhood and disrupt her children's schooling for an indefinite period.
By its very nature, the shelter is an intermediate solution-but an essential one.
In supporting shelters for the victims of domestic violence, we are literally
offering refuge to save the lives and health of hundreds of thousands of bat-
tered spouses. There can be no more important priority for government than this.
In the long run, we must make substantive changes in our attitude toward
domestic violence. We must stop making jokes about wife beatings and sturt
doing something about it. We have to admit that we have a problem so we can
take action to solve it.
An important beginning has been made as more people are willing to discuss
this issue more openly. I am submitting for inclusion into the record of these
hearings an excellent article on this subject which appeared in the Baltimore
Jewish Times last week entitled "Battered Wives."
But open discussion and volunteer activity alone can not do the job. State and
local governments must become more sensitive and get involved. Traditional
social service agencies need to be more interested in domestic violence. They
should follow the lead of these police departments which have become really
active. The courts and the criminal justice system need to develop more effective
response, and the federal government must be the catalyst for action.
The domestic violence prevention services Act, HR. 2977 include provisions
for both the long term and short term approach to this serious problem. It pro-
vides limited technical and financial assistance to community based programs
that give direct assistance to the victims of domestic violence. It requires states
to develop a long term plan which will include changing the criminal justice
system, social service delivery and public education.
I believe that passage of this legislation is essential to begin a genuine national
commitment to a serious national problem. It is urgently needed; and I hope that
the committee will agree with us that it is needed quickly.
Ms. Mncur~sKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to thank you for holding these hearings once again on
the issue of family violence, and I would just like to be able to
amplify, if I could, Mr. Miller's comments about the broad-based
coalition that truly supports this legislation. I think it will be exemp-
lified through the hearings that you will be observing over the next
few days. But the bill not only has wide congressional support that is
both bipartisan and not partial to a particular philosophical or ideo-
logical position in the Congress; it is supported by people who are
really concerned about family life in this country and the preservation
of life. ~
PAGENO="0031"
25
Second, when you look at the broad-based types of groups that you
have, they include every type from very strong feminist organiza-
tions to the International Police Chiefs Association. One out of four
police officers who are slain in this country every year are slain at the
scene of a domestic violence. The police officer comes in, and unlike
when coming upon a burglar or a thug, when he would be defensive
and he would have his gun out, his first impulse is to break up the
fight. Whoever has a weapon turns, and that is the end of Police
Officer So-and-So. So I just wanted you to be aware of that.
For those of you who are new to the committee, perhaps you know
me in my congressional hat, but I wasn't always making 57 grand a
yea.r reading the Federal Register.
There was a time when I spent probably the first 15 years of my
professional career out of college as a social worker. I have a degree
in the field. Child welfare and community organization have been my
specialty and I have been a child abuse and child neglect worker and a
worker in the field of family violence. So I do know a little bit about
what I am talking about.
When we introduced this legislation 1 year ago, I knew it was
needed, but it is now needed more than ever. I am absolutely con-
vinced that this issue is reaching almost an epidemic proportion in
this country. We know that the American economic situation is getting
worse. Some people are being called to destiny. Some people are being
called to the mountaintop to invent new and creative solutions.
But we have here before us today something that is specific, achiev-
able, and humane. While we are trying to solve the grand picture, we
know that American society is becoming increasingly complex and
difficult. People are afraid they won't get enough gas to go to work.
They are afraid of losing their jobs. And when they go to the grocery
store, they find that hamburger has become a gourmet food.
Within this particular climate, we find that family tensions inten-
sify and exacerbate, and what was once simply a family situation of
short tempers and impatience explodes into physical violence and even
gross brutality. And once it starts,, it tends to escalate. And once it
escalates, children tend to imitate the behavior of their parents.
So where they see mom and dad beating the heck out of one
another, then junior and sissy start beating each other. One of the
things also we know from LEAk and other statistics is the victim
of child abuse, while he is being beaten when he is 7, at age 17 will
turn around and beat the old lady next door. That is the kind of
escalation we see.
Now, for too long we have realized that, as Congresswoman Fer-
raro said, to admit that this kind of behavior could really happen
in America-we are the country of the "Run, Puff, Run" readers
where dad went to work with a briefcase and everyone was named
Dick and Jane and lived happily ever after. Wife beating was
something to be joked about, while the real victims who knew it
wasn't funny were too ashamed to speak out.
Police officers didn't want to treat family violence as a crime.
The court system made it difficult for women to press their charges,
and hospital emergency rooms found it more convenient to ignore
the real causes of injury and accept obviously false explanations
that let everyone off the hook because it was easier. She came in
PAGENO="0032"
26
battered. bruised, and beaten. They were more willing to listen to
her say "I ran into my ironing board" than to face up to the horrible
conditions in her home because they didn't know what to do with it
and they didn't have the resources.
In my own background, my own social services were very often
not responsive because this was a problem that made everyone feel
uncomfortable. The problem was too severe to be ignored forever.
Support and help came from battered women, developed from a
variety of community-based shelters. As has been stated earlier, it
started with volunteers operating on shoestring budgets.
Members of the committee, you know, when we talk about national
security, when we talk about saving lives, we never ask the Air
Force to hold a bake sale to build a B-i bomber. and we don't ask
researchers in esoteric diseases to support their own laboratories by
running thrift shops. Yet that is the advice we give American women
trying to save the lives and health of other women.
I feel it is time we provided some short-term support, both techni-
cal and financial, to enable these local programs to reach economic
self-sufficiency. That is a key component to our legislation: Federal
activity is catalytic so that local communities can move to economic
self-sufficiency.
The battered wife who flees her house in the middle of the night
because she is in terror should not have to worry about the shelter
being open or about where her children are going to be able to
survive.
To just further amplify what questions were raised about a shelter,
a shelter is a place where a woman can catch her breath, both physi-
cally a.nd psychologically, with the help and support of the staff
and other people at the shelter. She realizes the violence is not her
fault and that she doesn't have to submit to it. She can get infor-
mation about how to change her life and what options are available.
A shelter is not a place to stay forever or for even very long. A
woman who has been brutally beaten should not also have to abandon
her belongings or get out of her neighborhood or disrupt her chil-
dren's schooling, but it is essential that the shelter be an intermediate
solution.
In supporting shelters for victims of domestic violence, we. are liter-
ally offering refuge to have the lives and health of hundreds of thou-
sands of battered spouses. I don't think there can be any more impor-
tant priority for this government than this. In the long run we would
make substantive changes in our attitudes toward domestic violence.
We must stop making jokes about wife-beating and start doing some-
thing about it.
We have to admit that we have a problem and that we can take ac-
tion to solve it. Many articles are being written on this subject. My own
local magazine, the Baltimore Jewish Times, has an extensive article
which I submit for the record. But really, we find that open discussion
and volunteer activity cannot just do the job. State and loca.l govern-
ments must become sensitive and get involved. Social agencies need to
become more involved.
The Federal Government must be the catalytic factor. The legisla-
tion ,offereçl by Bogg~, Miller, and myself includes provision for long-
term and short-terth approath and pro~ides limited technical and
PAGENO="0033"
27
financial assistance to community-based programs, but it is the first
step, I think, in dealing with a very serious problem.
In conclusion, I would hope that the committee is aware that in
dealing with this problem today, not only will we save lives but we
really, I think, will give people, and not only the adult victims 0±
battering, the right to a future. If we can intervene in some type of
solid, ongoing way that brings about change, I think that we are going
to see a lot less violence in `the next generation.
So I hope you found my insights helpful and I will be happy to
answer any questions you have. I look forward to your unanimous
vote from the subcommittee.
Mr. SmroN. While that applause technically violated the rules of
the I-louse, I think it speaks for the `subcommittee and our apprecia-
tion of your leadership on this.
I have no questions. Mr. Beard.
Mr. BEARD. (Nods negatively.)
Mr. SIMoN. Mr. Kramer.
Mr. KRAMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Barbara., my experience is not in this area. However, I have had
some experience with LEAA. I have seen some of the same problems
that LEAA has had with regard to moving into this type of program,
if it is established. Much of LEAA, apparently, for purposes of equip-
ment and the like has been siphoned off to other programs. As a result
LEAA has never really been able to meet the general challenge of
solving the problem of rampant crime in our country, for which it was
established.
One of the frequent comments I heard when I was a State legislator
was that the Federal Government provides the seed money and thereby
gets the State on the hook. When Uncle Sam pulls out, then there is
no solid source of funding left. Many of these programs, therefore,
last 3 years and then die. Then someone starts up another one where
new Federal grant funds are available and it lasts for 3 years before
it then dies.
Do you see any similar problems in the way in which this bill is
structured? I notice that it reads that you can get up to 50 percent
the first year, and then the Federal contribution drops to 25 percent.
Then there is a total pullout after 3 years. In light of the background
I discussed, both in terms of what LEAA was set up to do originally
and what they have, in effect, really done, and also in terms of the 3-
year phaseout, do you see any of the same problems arising if this seed
program were to be. created?
Ms. MIKTTLSKI. Mr. Kramer, I share your concerns. When the three
architects of this legislation `drafted this. we tried to take this into
consideration. Let me outline the difference. No. 1, the money goes
to cornmun~t.y-ba.sed groups. It does not go to big agencies who want
to siphon off our bucks to pay for their own administrative costs, and
that is one of the things I have seen. Very often Federal funds were
used as a closet way of paying for city and county programs.
And second. I too saw the hardware acquisition of the law enforce-
ment system. They were buying tanks and helicopters and all that
other kind of stuff. In this way, the emphasis is not on the. Government
buying, building, and constructing their own shelters but in maximiz-
49-9i4-79----3
PAGENO="0034"
28
ing the resources in our own community by providing the bucks for
programs and not necessarily by building.
So examples would be like this. Rather than the city of Baltimore
building its own shelter, it could through community development
block grant money get the facility another way. It could, for example,
have a consortium of services w~here the Catholic charities in a local
community could donate a no longer used convent, while the bucks
from this program could be used for staff.
So it moves from the acquisition of buildings and into the providing
of services.
Second, in terms of States, not only is the time factor built in but
we are talking about two things: One, that you need a State plan,
which means you begin to identify the resources within your State to
do that; second, when LEAA was created in the days of the great
society, the Federal Government had all the bucks and the States
were poor.
My reading of today's economic situation shows that the States are
loaded while we have a deficit. My own State has a $200 million surplus
that it wasn't quite sure how to distribute in a way that would meet
the needs of Maryland. So I think the States have the money, and the
discipline of developing the. plon. I think, has shifted. But I think
you are going to need a combined series of support.
I believe in voluntary funclraising~ but it should not be the sole
source. That is why I macic my comments about the thrift shop. I
think a partnership between Government, the TJniteci Fund Agencies
and then aggressive fundraising on the part of the services themselves
would meet the need.
I don't know if that answers your question.
Mr. KRAMER. I have one more question. in light of your statement
about the Federal and State situation. Conceptually do we want to get,
from a pure economic standpoint., the Federal Government involved in
the subject area of domestic violence? Would it not better be han-
`died at the State and local level if financing is made available from t.h~
States to groups such as have appeared before us today. Would it nol;
be better for these groups to go to the State legislatures and explain
their problems or to local governmental entities to explain their prob-
lems and request funding rather than setting in operation a whole new
Federal apparatus to deal with what appears to me to be a State issue?
Ms. MIKULsKI. First of all, there are two ways that initiatives get
started in this country: One through mass-based social movements,
and that is really what the Coalition of Battered Women is all about.
It is truly a mass-based movement. It is not something Lindy Boggs,
George Miller, and Barbara Mikuiski thought up. I am not criticizing
your view.
It is out of this that in effect they have turned to where the tradi-
tional leadership has begun to be a catalyst nationwide, and that is the
Federal Government. What we find is that some States have been very
aggressive, very responsive, and others have been quite lackluster.
So I think we have had a historic role, No. 1. But the other thing
about this legislation is we leave it free to the local community to
design the kind of program that it best needs itself. We are not coming
up with a shelter franchise program for Holiday Inn to go into.
PAGENO="0035"
29
What we are talking about is where grassroot groups design their
own program.
Congressman Kramer, the kind of program you would run in affluent
Montgomery County is one type. It is suburban. It has public trans-
portation. There are easy opportunities for anonymity. That would be
very different from a program you would run in a barrio in south
Texas or in the hollows of Appalachia or in the inner city of Baltimore.
So we want `local communities to be able to design those kinds of pro-
grams which best meet their needs, through the creativity of the local
community. We provide a few bucks as a catalytic factor, and then
through the State plan, hopefully they will then be more responsive
at that level.
Mr. SnioN. Mr. Miller.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to thank you for your support and your leadership. Let
me make that clear. It is not a supporting role; it is a role of
leadership in keeping this issue before the Congress. I guess the sad
thing about today is that we are still talking about implementation
rather than some kind of aggressive oversight to see how the program
is working, but hopefully that will end with this Congress when this
legislation is passed. And the credit clearly must go to you.
I just want to join with what you have said. We can argue about
whether this is a local responsibility or a Federal responsibility, and
I have never found that there is any clear prescription for either one.
It generally goes to whether or not the local Congressman who is get-
ting heat can generate a solution or whether it is only a solution that
can be generated at the local level.
I think in this case we are. We are trying to provide the catalyst.
We heard testimony last year from people who were trying to start
these programs in communities where there was simply no support
because of the nature of the community, the closeness of the commu-
nity, that almost the community felt ashamed to admit that this was a
problem in their setting.
I think that what we are providing here, hopefully, is the ability
to bring together other resources, whether it is to draw upon CETA
placements, whether it is to draw upon charitable moneys, the coordi-
nation of other programs to meet what is clearly a local problem but
also is clearly national in scope because it is in every community. It
is from Bethesda to the poorest communities in my district. It is in
every economic stra~a of this country, as members of this committee
will hear today and tomorrow.
It is a problem of national scope, and the numbers alone dictate that
the Federal Government provide some assistance. I go back, and I
guess we all have favorites. I-Ienry Hyde mentioned programs he
thinks we are spending too much on. Mr. Kramer has his. Barbara,
you have yours. But for six cases of swine flu, in 2 hours we found
$300 million, and now we are incurring billions of dollars in lawsuits.
I think the question is, after 3 years of rather judicious hearings
on this matter, whether or not we can find an almost embarrassingly
small amount to try to help a limited number of communities with an
overwhelming problem and to try to address it.
So I think we ought not to get sidetracked on the question of Fed-
eral problems versus local problems. The testimony today, I think,
PAGENO="0036"
30
will bear out exactly what you have said. This is the offer of somewhat
of a helping hand to those people who are interested enough in their
own community and the people in their community and the families
to try to address a serious problem.
Mr. Chairman, I would ask unanimous consent that I could insert,
at a point after Congresswoman Mikulski's testimony, my opening
statement for the record.
Mr. SDI0N. It will be entered in the record.
[The prepared statement of Hon. George Miller follows:]
INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT OF Hox. GEORGE MILLER
I would like to thank the chairman for providing thiS opportunity to consider
domestic violence legislation, including my bill, H.R. 2977, and his subcommittee
staff for their efforts in putting together a hearing on this critical but generally
ignored issue. I only regret that rather than playing our appropriate oversight
function on already enacted legislation, we find ourselves renewing our efforts
to provide Federal support for victims of spousal abuse, a problem which has
tragically invaded millions of American families, a problem which continues to
go unreported or underreported, a problem which leaves many people without
shelter or protection, and without any means of financial support.
Last year's legislation and hearings drew national attention to one of the
most prevalent social problems in our country. Most Members of Congress were
startled to learn the extremely disturbing facts about the level of domestic
violence. However, while we have successfully illuminated the extent of the
problem and stimulated activity at all levels of government, unfortunately, we
have failed in our leadership role to respond to the grave and immediate needs
of the millions of families who are victims.
The results of Congress inaction are costly in terms of physical and emotional
stability of families, fatalities among those who are abused as well as among
police who come to their aid, and inappropriate and consequently costly place-
ment and treatment of victims. A number of social service providers will testify
today to the currently ineffective and inefficient use of human and monetary
resources and, on the other hand, stimulate our thinking on ways to respond
sensitively. We will also have the opportunity to hear from various representa-
tives of the administration concerning initiatives they have taken to learn more
about the problems related to spousal abuse.
Let me take a moment to retrace our steps. As many of you may remember,
last year I introduced a simliar bill, H.R. 12299, the Domestic Violence Assistance
Act. It was cosponsored by many of my subcommittee colleagues and by my col-
leagues from Louisiana and Maryland, Lindy Boggs and Barbara Mikulski.
Throughout the development of this legislation, this bill enjoyed strong bipar-
tisan support. Because the legislation responded so well to the particular needs
of the estimated 1.8 million battered spouses annually, it received enormous
grassroots support. A diverse coalition of professional organizations-including
the American Bar Association, the International Association of Police Chiefs, the
International Brotherhood of Policemen, the National Conference of Catholic
Charities, the National League of Cities, and the United Auto Workers-also
endorsed our legislation.
H.R. 12299 failed under suspension of the rules in May of last year. Neverthe-
less, pressure from local communities and interest groups throughout the country,
led to the House Rules Committee considering my legislation. Late in September
1978 the committee granted a rule, clearing the way for floor consideration.
Since this mounting interest had also successfully gained the passage of a
-rompanion measure in the Senate, it is regrettable that the House did not have
time to consider the bill before the close of the 95th Congress.
In response to concerns raised about my legislation, I have made some modi-
fications in the components of this year's bill, H.R. 2977, which has already
Theen cosponsored by 80 House Members. This year's bill provides a role for the
States in planning and conducting programs. We have continued to stress limited
Federal support of community based programs. Throughout the legislation, an
emphasis has been placed on minimizing Federal intervention and retainino con-
trol of the program in the hands of the local people. At this point. I would like to
Insert for the record a section-by-section analysis of H.R. 2977. This analysis
PAGENO="0037"
31
describes in detail the State and Federal grant programs which the bill
authorizes.
Since I introduced H.R. 2977, the President has established an administrative
mechanism in HEW which could play a pivotal role in the implementation of
the domestic violence prevention and services act. I believe the actions taken
by the administration are an encouraging first step. However, this is not enough.
It is essential that Congress take the second step in fashioning a coordinated
and effective response to the problems of spousal abuse. For despite laudatory
efforts initiated at the State and local level, violence among family members con-
tinues unabated. Even where assistance is available, the demand for emergency
care as well as longer-term preventive services far exceeds the supply. Enact-
ment of H.R. 2977 would be a fiscally wise investment in the American family.
Mr. SmroN. Mr. Erdahl.
Mr. ERDAHL. I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to thank the distinguished colleague for her blunt and
perceptive testimony. It was very helpful.
Ms. Mnnii4sxi. Thank you. Sheriff?
Mr. STACK. Blunt? The gentle lady, when she began her testimony,
made reference to going to the top of her mountain. I would say, in the
context of her testimony and the problem we are addressing here today,
she has been to the mountain. She demonstrates this by her very percep-
tive and broad view that she has given us here of the problem.
I congratulate her and the other authors, who she has clearly
intimated. [General laughter.]
I would say that I would support the legislation.
I will support the legislation fully. I thank you and I have to leave
at this point.
Ms. MniuLsKI. Thank you, Congressman Stack. It is just my feeling
that if we can provide Camp David as a shelter for battered Presidents,
we can provide shelter for battered women. [Applause and laughter.]
Mr. STACK. Right on, Barbara.
Mr. SmroN. We thank you for your testimony.
Our next witness is Dr. Jeanie Meyer, Research Associate of the
Kansas City Police Department.
We are happy to have you with us, Dr. Meyer, and if you wish to
enter your statement in the record and summarize it, we can proceed
in that way or in whatever way you wish.
Ms. MEYER. I would just like to summarize my statement.
Mr. SIMON. All right. It will be entered into the record.
[The prepared statement of Jeanie Keeny Meyer follows:]
TESTIMONY OF JEANIE KEENY MEYER, KANSAS CITY, Mo., POLICE DEPARTMENT
INTRODUCTION
I am speaking today from two perspectives: first, as a researcher for the
Kansas City, Missouri, Police Department, I would like to reiterate the results
of research we have conducted in the area of domestic disturbances; secondly,
I would like to briefly share information (and frustration) about the obstacles
to developing a program in Kansas City to address the domestic violence prob-
lem of the scope, both in terms of numbers and complexity, which our research
has documented.
The Kansas City, Missouri, Police Department has been engaged in research on
domestic violence since 1972, initially with support from the Police Foundation
and most recently with grant support (RO1MH 27918) from the National Insti-
tute of Mental Health. The results of this research, which have been widely cited,
are startling both in terms of the pervasiveness of the problem and the level of
violence endemic in family dispute situations.
PAGENO="0038"
32
VOLUME OF DISTURBANO~ CALLS AS A POLICE PROBLEM
Looking first at domestic violence incidents as they come to the attention of the
police, we find that disturbance calls' to which Kansas City, Missouri, Police
responded in 1975, numbered approximately 64,000 or 12 percent of the total
number of calls received. These disturbances (of which 40,000 were "founded,"
that is a disturbance was still in progress when officers arrived) consumed an
average of 41 minutes each-which means that, since two officers are required to
respond to each disturbance, a total of 43,733 law enforcement hours or $524,709
(i.e., 43,733 hours X 2 officers x $6.00 an hour) were expended.
REPEAT POLICE CALLS TO THE SAME DISTURBANCE LOCATION
Much has been written about the inadequacy of the police response to family
violence situations. While the Kansas City, Missouri, Police Department's policy
is to respond to all calls, training, attitude and resource deficiencies of police
response, as documented elsewhere, are indeed recurrent problems. A look at
the number of times to which officers make repeat calls to the same disturbance
address is one quantifiable manifestation of police difficulty in dealing with
such situations.
Within the 1976, calendar year, the police had been at the address of an
assault previously for disturbance calls in 33 percent of the cases (607 of 1,832)
at least once and in 19 percent of the cases (340 of 1,832) two or more times.
Police had been at the address of a homicide previously for disturbance calls
in 20 percent of the cases (19 of 66)2 at least once and in 17 percent of the
cases (11 of 06) two or more times.
These computations about the number of repeat calls to disturbance scenes
further support our earlier Kansas City, findings that:
In 27 percent of the homicides and 37 percent of the aggravated assaults
one of the participants had been arrested for disturbance or assault in the
preceding two years.
In the two years prior to the domestic assault or homicide, the police
had been at the address of the incident for disturbance calls in 85 percent
of the cases at least once and in 54 percent of the cases, five or more times.
OBSTACLES TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT
The research evidence I have cited today is significant both in terms of the
gravity of the problem it describes and in terms of the potential it suggests for
an "early warning system" for family violence. That is, at least for that portion
of family violence which is reported to police, there are a sizable number of
disturbance calls which precede, and therefore should alert us to the potential
for greater violence in the future at that same location.
The Kansas City, Missouri, Police Department, recognizing the importance
of these findings, has been working to try to develop programs which can address
the needs identified. In collaboration with a newly developed shelter for battered
women in Kansas City, Rose Brooks Center, Inc., efforts are underway to forge
an alliance between police and much-needed crisis intervention, emergency shel-
ter and extended social services.
I would like to share with you some of the difficulties in trying to develop
resources and programs for battered women. These are some of the problems
encountered by Rose Brooks Center, Inc., which other community-based shelters
as well report as constraints and obstacles to the task of "networking" the
range of services needed to respond to victims of violence and their dependents.
1. Food 2tamp Program-Department of Agriculture.-In some jurisdiction
food stamp programs are restricted to persons living in single-family dwelling
units. This excludes the use of such stamps by abused women who are in a
group housing situation in an emergency shelter where they take refuge.
1 At the time police cars are sent to the scene of a call, the dispatcher assigns calls to a
classification. The number cited here includes calls either originally assigned the classifica-
tion of disturbance or reclassified as disturbance by the officer after arrival at the scene.
It is impossible to positively determine from this data set precisely just which of these
disturbances were domestic, i.e. occurred in a residence or between family members. The
dispatcher sub-categories of disturbance here assumed to encompass domestic disturbances
were: "disturbance" (general, "investigative trouble," "mental" and "noise."
2 The numbers of incidents given the dispatch call classification of homicide does not
correspond exactly to the number of incidents reported as UCR homicide offenses.
PAGENO="0039"
33
2. Hot Breakfast/Lunch Program-Department of Agrieulture.-At the present
time, emergency `shelters provide housing and care for the children of abuse
victims, but as yet the shelters are not recognized as eligible institutions to
receive reimbursement for a hot breakfast and lunch program.
3. Department of Housing and Urban Development.-Eligibility for admittance
into public housing is confined to families. While a battered women with kids,
may be admitted under these guidelines, the battered woman without children
is excluded. Moreover, some jurisdictions will consider the husband's income
as an eligibility criterion even if the woman applying is separated, fleeing from
an abusive spouse and without financial support.
4. Legal Aid-Legal ~Serviees Corporation; Community Mental Health Centers-
NIMH.-The issue of eligibility is again a restricting factor in obtaining services
from these agencies, since a husband's income is considered even when the appli-
cant is a battered woman, from an abusive spouse, who has limited or no financial
resource of her own.
5. Domestic Violence Program-Law Enforcement Assistance Administration.-
While a comprehensive domestic violence program model emphasizing prosecu-
tion is being supported by discretionary LEAA funding, it appears that the evo-
lution of such program models should recognize the need for phased service devel-
opment. Right now, so few cities have put together an adequate service delivery
system for family violence victims, that battered women, for example, do not
have sufficient access to resources and `support to enable them to persevere in
their intent to prosecute a violent spouse, especially where shelter, counseling,
and financial independence from the man being prosecuted, are absent. Realisti-
cally, jurisdictions need to have criminal justice and social service training and
services in place before an increase in the rate of domestic assault prosecution
can be expected.
SUMMARY OVERVIEW
What we have learned from the research and early program development
efforts in the area of domestic violence can tell us much about future domestic
violence intervention programming design.
We know that the needs of domestic violence victims and their dependents cut
across a wide spectrum of existing criminal justice and social service providers.
We also know that the nature and complexity of family violence and its origins
have only recently begun to be recognized. While agencies and services relevant
to the violence victim often already exist, as in law enforcement, counseling,
food, housing and jobs, frequently these services as structured now are either
ineffective, due to lack of understanding or training or unavailable to the violence
victim particularly the battered woman, due to inappropriate eligibility require-
ments.
Seed money for domestic violence programming can stimulate the development
of programs which can eventualy be institutionalized in their communities, if the
special service coordination, training and eligibility of the client population are
recognized.
STATEMENT OF ~EANIE KEENY MEYER, POLICE DEPARTMENT,
KANSAS CITY, MO.
Ms. MEYER. I am speaking today from two different kinds of perspec-
tives, first of all as a researcher for the Kansas City (Mo.) police de-
partment. I would like to share with you some of the research that we
have been conducting in the area of domestic violence.
I would also like to share with you some information and also some
frustration about the obstacles of developing a domestic violence
shelter program within the Kansas City area. Looking first at the dis-
turbance call, which is the form in which family violence comes to the
attention of the police officer, we find that disturbance calls really
consume a tremendous amount of officer time and, as has also been
said earlier, is a very dangerous kind of situation.
In terms of time, in 1975 there were 40,000 disturbances within the
Kansas City area and these represent about 12 percent of the total
PAGENO="0040"
34
number of calls police officers make. In terms of money, averaging
about 40 minutes for each call. This comes to about a half million
dollars just in terms of response to disturbance calls.
There has also been a lot written about the inadequacy of police
response to family violence situations, and while the Kansas City
(Mo.) police department's policy is to respond to all calls, training,
attitude, and resource deficiencies of police response is an ongoing and
recurrent problem.
Look at the nmnber of times which officers make repeat calls to the
same disturbance address. I think that is one way of seeing very tan-
gibly the lack of resources and the inadequacies of the response, and
also the violence of those situations. I would like to quote some of the
findings that we have with regard to disturbances.
In 27 percent of the homicides and 37 percent of the aggravated as-
saults, one of the participants had been arrested for disturbance or
assault in the preceding two years. In the two years prior to the
domestic assault or homicide, the police had been at the address of the
incidence for disturbance calls, in 85 percent of the cases, at least once,
and in 54 percent of the cases, five or more times.
So I think you can see the linkage between the disturbance and vio-
lence and also why violence is perceived as a problem for police officers,
both in terms of danger to themselves and also in terms of the inad-
equacy of their own training, background and resources.
I would like to also share with you some of the difficulties in trying
to develop resources and programs for battered women. These are
some of the problems which have been encountered by a new shelter in
Kansas City, Rosebrook Center, but they are also shared, I think, by
other comnnmity-based shelters who report these kinds of constraints
and obstacles in developing resources and networking resources for
the very complex kinds of problems which shelters have to dea.l with.
I am going to just share with you a couple of examples of programs
which look in terms of their target area, which is very relevant to the
needs of victims of family violence but which, for one reason or an-
other at this point do not seem to be coordinated in order to make those
reasonable resources.
First of all, in terms of the food stamp program, in some jurisdic-
tions food stamp programs are restricted to persons living in single
family dwelling units. This excludes the use of such stamps by abused
women who are in a group housing situation in an emergency shelter
where they take refuge. The hot breakfast and lunch program of the
Department of Agriculture is, I think, another example where at the
present time emergency shelters provide housing and care for the
children of abuse victims; but as yet, the shelters are not recognized as
eligible institutions to receive reimbursement for a hot breakfast and
lunch program.
At HTJD, eligibility for admittance into public housing is confined
to families. While a battered woman with kids may be admitted under
these guidelines, the battered woman without children is excluded.
Moreover, some jurisdictions will consider the husband's income as an
eligibility criterion even if the woman applying is separated or fleeing
from an abusive spouse and is without financial support.
Legal Aid, and also community mental health centers. The issue of
eligibility is also a restricting factor in obtaining services from these
PAGENO="0041"
35
:agencieS since the husband's income is considered even when the ap-
plicant is a battered woman who has limited or no financial resources of
:her own.
In terms of LEAA's domestic violence program, this is a comprehen-
:sive model which emphasizes prosecution, being currently funded by
discretionary LEAA funding. But it appears that the evolution of
such program models should recognize the need for phased service
development. By that I mean that right now there are very few cities
who have put together an adequate, comprehensive service delivery sys-
tern for family violence victims.
In many cases the battered women, for example, do not have suffi-
cient access to resources and support in order to enable them to perse-
vere in their intent to prosecute a violent spouse, especially where
~shelter, counseling and financial independence from the man being
prosecuted are absent.
RealisticaiJy, I think jurisdictions need to have criminal justice and
social service training and services in place before we can really begin
1o see an increase in the rate of domestic assault prosecution. I think
~what we have learned from the research and early program develop-
ment efforts in the area of domestic violence can tell us a great deal
:about future domestic violence programming design.
We know that the needs of domestic violence victims and their de-
`pendents cut across a wide spectrum of existing criminal justice and
social services. We also know that the nature and complexity of family
violence and its origins have only recently begun to be recognized,
while agencies and services relevant to the violence victim often already
exist, as in law enforcement, counseling, food, housing and jobs.
Frequently these services as structured now are either ineffective
due to lack of understanding or training, or unavailable to the violence
victim, particularly the battered women, due to inappropriate eligi-
bility requirements. I think seed money which is represented in House
~bill 2977 for domestic violence programming can stimulate the develop-
ment of programs which can eventually be institutionalized into their
communities, and I think that can only happen if the special service
coordination, training, and eligibility of the client population are
recognized.
Mr. Sm~oN. Thank you for your statement and for the impressive
statistics. I have one question. You cite these problem areas. On point
one, the food stamp program, the hot breakfast and lunch program,
number two, and number four, particularly the legal aid portion there,
do you happen to know if the restrictions there are statutory or
Tegulatory?
Ms. MEYER. I really cannot tell you. I know in some cases those things
vary in terms of State policies.
Mr. SIMoN. Tom, if I could ask the staff~ let's check that out. I think
that is something which is not directly related to the bill at hand. but
I think it is an important point which you have made where there
obviously ought to be some changes made which could be of substantial
nssistance.
Another reason for moving in this area is that these kinds of incon-
sistencies in statutes or regulations can be modified.
Ms. MEYER. I think that is one reason why the coordinating element
of the bill would be important in terms of these kinds of issues.
PAGENO="0042"
36
Mr. SmI0N. Mr. Miller.
Mr. MILLJ~R. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Ms. Meyer, I want to thank you for coming and sharing your ex-
perience and research with us. I think the two points which you point
out which are very helpful to us as we make a decision are, first, that a
long time before an individual comes to a shelter and comes to court,
as Ms. Ferraro testified to earlier, there has been an involvement and
an expenditure of money and services with that individual and with
that situation, really, for a long-time prior to their seeking out this
kind of help. Your testimony seems to bear that out in terms of Kansas
City when you recite how many times the police have been to that
address or that living situation prior to the filing of charges or the
leaving of home.
I think it is very important that we understand that as we talk
about this legislation in terms of prevention.
The other one is, when you cite the obstacles, that is something that
we started to become aware of as we addressed this legislation. The
administration has scrambled to try to put together some coordinate
Federal front on a proposal to coordinate these services, and we have
tried to address some of the questions within title XX.
It is somewhat of a leading question, but on page 4 where you talk
about the services being available-and I think sometimes this is what
we equate with a local problem here, that they are already there, they
can already get this help. I guess if you persevere, the county hospital
is there so you can always end up in the county hospital, and the jail is
there so the husband can always end up in jail. The services are there.
Let me ask you. Is this your own opinion or is this the result of some
of the studies that you have done in terms of shelters leading to a co-
ordination of State and local services for victims?
Ms. MEYER. This is a result of some of the collaborative effort the
Kansas City Police Department has been engaged in trying to develop
a shelter program in Kansas City. And I think it also points out, in
addition to Federal regulations in terms of administration of pro-
grams, also the very real need to do some education and training for
professional workers who really are not familiar with the complexity
of working with battered women and some of the very special needs
that they have. So I think the training issue is also very relevant.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you.
Mr. SmroN. Mr. Kramer.
Mr. KRAMER. Dr. Meyer. do you have any involvement in this area
other than involvement in the statistical analysis?
Ms. MEYER. I am also on the board of the shelter in Kansas City.
Mr. KRAMER. I mean, in terms of your association with the Kansas
City Police Department?
Ms. MEYER. I am the researcher there.
Mr. KRAMER. Do you get into this area in detail, or is this one of the
areas you cover in compiling other statistics for the department?
Ms. MEYER. We have been involved in a couple of research projects.
One was funded by the police foundation, and most recently one funded
by NIMH.
Mr. KRAMER. Were you yourself involved in those research projects?
[Ms. Meyer nods affirmatively.]
PAGENO="0043"
37
Mr. Kn~&MER. What, in your judgment, would this legislation do
that is not presently available to you now in some form in Kansas
City, for example?
Ms. MEYER. One of the major problems in terms of establishing
credibility for a new kind of program, particularly a program like this
in the area of domestic violence, which does make a lot of people nerv-
ous and is not very well understood, is, ~rst of all, getting community
acceptance for the issue, credibility for the issue; and second of all, in
terms of approaching private contributors.
It is like going to a bank. You have to have money to get money. So
that they like to know that there is some stability, there is some core
kind of funding. That, again, is one of the problems in terms of at-
tracting money or contributions to a program.
Mr. KRAMER. In terms of the scope of the problem itself, and your
own experience, you cited some examples in terms of percentages. I
see, for example, your statistics on disturbances here. Does that mean
domestic disturbance?
Ms. MEYER. Yes. And the data collection is difficult because it is not
a pure just domestic disturbances. There is some bias in the data in
terms of classification, but other types of disturbances other than resi-
dential disturbances have been paired off out of that.
Mr. KRAMER. Do you have any specific statistics on domestic dis-
turbances per se?
Ms. MEYER. These are domestic disturbances. But what I am saying
is they may not always be solely confined to family members because
we don't have that data for this information.
Mr. KRAMER. So you don't break these down at all into what is a
husband or a wife battering incident.
Ms. MEYER. Or what is a husband and children or grandchildren.
No; not with these statistics. These are based upon all of the calls
that officers make during a year's period of time.
Mr. KRAMER. Do you have any statistics of that type?
Ms. MEYER. Yes; we do, although I don't have them with me today.
Mr. KRAMER. You mean you do have statistics of a type limited
solely to an analysis of the spousal relationship or things of that
sort?
Ms. MEYER. Yes, sir. Yes, sir.
Mr. KRAMER. Could you provide those? Quite frankly, I think
that they would be more meaningful than perhaps these might be.
Would you be able to do that?
Ms. MEYER. I don't have them with me but I can, sure.
Mr. KRAMER. I would appreciate having these statistics in a' rea-
sonably short time fran'ie so that we could have them for our own
informational purposes when we go through this bill.
MS. MEYER. Sure.
Mr. KRAMER. Thank you.
Mr. SIMON. Mr. Erdahl.
Mr. ERDAIIL. I have no questions, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SIMON. Ms. Mikulski.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Meyer, I would like to compliment you on the research. I
have been sharply critical of NIMH because I have said for years
PAGENO="0044"
38
they sit around and study the victim and do not want to help the
~victim. I have referred to a lot of Government agencies as being grant
junkies and wondered whatever happened to the money. But I can see
:your money was put to good use even though we may not have the
;numerical data Congressman Kramer is asking for.
Have you developed any kind of profiles of disturbance situations?
-us there a profile that emerges in Kansas `City that most of the vic-
tims are women or men or where there is battering of spouse there
is usually battering of children, or have you put together any kind
of a profile?
Ms. MEYER. We really don't have that kind of data specifically in
terms of profiles.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Tell me from your own experience. You might not
be able to tell me what your computer tells me, but what do you know
from your observations in working with the data?
Ms. MEYER. Generally in terms of working with the problem we
very much see a pattern between family members living together. I
guess one of the things that has been surprising to me is to see again the
number of times in which the children are actually involved, partic-
ularly, as I worked with a case last week where there was an older boy
who was very much intimidated by the father and picked on by the
father and was very much torn at the time when the mother was
leaving the home with her children, fleeing from the home when the
husband had gotten angry and was waving around a gun, and seeing
the elder boy scared, really, to leave the father because he had been
abused by him before.
In this case the woman had gone back to him because she had tried
to make it on her own and didn't have enough resources, so she had
left the home with this older son and had gone back and lie was abused
again and, I suppose, punished for leaving with her, So it is that kind
of a situation.
Ms. MIKULsKI. But it is your observation, though, that where there
is abuse in the family, it is not usually one person upon another but
is of a multiple type?
Ms. MEYER. In many cases it is.
Ms. MIKUL5KI. You raise some other interesting issues in your testi-
mony, one of which is how Federal policy in itself mitigates against
delivering an effective social service program. As you know, our leg-
islation calls for a national clearinghouse for the purpose of collect-
ing information, reviewing Federal, State, and local programs, et
cetera, to see how this works.
Do you think that would be an important tool: one, a clearinghouse
where you could go for help, and second, where we have to sit around
in the same room and make sure we are getting service to the people
who need it?
Ms. MEYER. Absolutely, especially in terms of those are resources
that are already there but right now they are not accessible. to the
clients of shelte~rs. So I think ~that is definitely an important element
of the bill.
Ms. MIKtrLsIu. So to summarize what you are saying, we must place
a great deal of emphasis on the shelter aspect, but you feel a clearing-
house is critical?
Ms. MEYER. (Nods affirmatively.)
Ms. MIltuisKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. No further questions.
PAGENO="0045"
39
Mr. Si~rô~t. Thank you, Dr. Meyer.
I might mention to Dr. Meyer and to any of the other witnesses
that if you have any suggestions as you look over the legislation as
to how it might be modified, if you have suggestions for the future,
the hope of the Chair is that immediately after the Labor Day recess,
we will mark up legislation and move ahead, so any suggestions ought
to be in by that time.
Thank you, Dr. Meyer.
Our next witness is Dr. Saul Edeistein, director of emergency
services, George Washington University Hospital.
Dr. Edeistein, we welcome you here and you can proceed as you
wish.
We can enter your statement in the record and you can summarize
it, or however you wish to proceed.
STATEMENT OP DR. SAUL EDELSTEIN, DIRECTOR, EM~ERGENCY
SERVICES, GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL
Dr. EDELSTEIN. My prepared statement is not ready today, unfortu-
nately, because of some local secretarial problems, which are not un-
common in our institution. But I do have some comments to make in
that when I received a call from your staff asking me to make some
testimony here today, I realized how ignorant I was of the problem.
Being rather active in local and national circles in emergency med-
icine, I contacted several directors, both locally and throughout the
country. Frankly, I couldn't find anyone who knew anything about
this problem.
My second step was to go to the library, as all academics want to do,
and run a search through the National Medical Library related to the
battered spouse syndrome. I brought that with me because I thought
it was remarkably deplete. You will find that if you run this search for
English literature articles, a total of 26 articles will appear, only one
of which, and that comes out of the British Medical Journal, relates to
the incidence, prevalence, and numbers of battered spouses. That arti-
cle was done in 1977.
So 2 years ago it was recognized by someone and there has been
no single piece of research in the American literature, the American
medical literature, that I am aware of that relates to this particular
problem.
So I went to the next step, which was to review our own records in
our emergency room. We are a very busy, active downtown Washing-
ton, D.C. emergency room. We see approximately 40,000 patients a
year. And in the first 6 months of this year, which would be 20~O00
patient visits, I was able to identify from the record three cases of
battered spouses.
That seumed remarkably low to me, but I didn't know. I thought
maybe the problem is much more exaggerated than actually exists, and
maybe exaggerated in the lay literature. So I then began to query my
staff, primarily the nursing staff, and, asked them if indeed this prob-
lem exists; and indeed, it does.
It breaks out frito three types of patients who come to the emer-
gency room. When they come to the emergency room, we are usually
seeing the end result. We are in that case, I think, the place of last
PAGENO="0046"
40
resort. The three types are: the patient who presents with a life-threat-
ening injury, who has no choice but to come to the emergency room,
either by ambulance or other conveyance. And I would like to cite an
example that occured here in Washington about a year ago, a little
over a year ago during the winter months.
It was a 22-year-old white female who was brought to our emergency
room on a cold night by the ambulance, who had jumped out of a sec-
ond story just north of Dupont Circle on Connecticut Avenue, which,
as you also know, is a very busy thoroughfare. She was totally nude at
the time. She had jumped because she had been stabbed by her husband
multiple times and that didn't stop him.
He then cut all her hair off and poured gasoline on her and tried to
burn her. He was unable to ignite the gasoline and, as a last resort, he
tried to strangle her. After all of these insults, she finally made the
decision to break free. She went through the second story window onto
`Connecticut Avenue.
She came to us. She required operative management and further in-
tensive care. In fact, while she was in our institution she cost a mini-
mum of $700 a day in our intensive care unit. Now, we get two or three
of these type of females a year, but I have to agree with Representative
Miller's comment that the males who come are severely battered.
They are not the ones who get punched. They are not the ones who
get clubbed with a chair. Their male egos or what have you Prevent
them from coming. It is the ones who have been stabbed or shot or the
Ones who are dead. There are very rarely numbers on those.
The fact of the matter is I believe that severe battered spouses
probably rank equally in the male category. And again, there is no
research that I am aware of to support any of this data. There is no
data. But I would suggest that the committee-I have not seen the leg-
islation-think about developing appropriate data.
The second type of patient is the patient who comes in with a n'iild
injury, if you will, one which is not life threatening, and who claims
that she has indeed been beaten by herself, or lie has been beaten by his
spouse. We had an example about 3 weeks ago of an elderly male about
70 years old who was getting away from his spouse who was beating
him and tried to enter into .the emergency room treatment area to
continue to beat him.
These patients are low in number, though. It is rare the battered
spouse will come in and say to the clerk: I am here because someone
is beating me up.
The third group of patients, which is the vast majority, are females
who have come in with a `bruising, a fracture, something of that na-
ture, who claim to have fallen in the bathtub. fallen down the stairs
the day befOre or the night before, rarely at the time of the incident.
They make this complaint, they come in, and when the nurse is in the
room. the nurse will often confront them and ask them directly whether
or not they have indeed fallen down the stairwell or have been beaten.
Most of the time they will admit on direct inquiry by the nurse-
rarely to the physician, I must add, maybe because of the male-female
syndrome or what have you-that yes, they indeed have been beaten.
Would they like to press charges? No. they would not like to press
charges. Where are they going to go? Well, ~hey will figure it out.
PAGENO="0047"
41
In talking with our social worker, who I think is superb, I queried
her in depth about the number of patients she has had to send out or
was not able to locate or get an appropriate disposition for. At least
from the emergency room setting, it does not happen very often. It
may be our inability or our lack of identifying these patients, which I
think is a critical factor, frankly, but when we do identify them, there
do seem to be resources within the community.
I would also like to point out that since we are a downtown hospital
and we are close to a well-known corridor on 14th Street, that there are
a group of women who are maintaining relationships with males-I
don't know how you classify them-but obviously who are in some
sort of unusual relationship, primarily prostitutes who come in and are
often severely beaten, who are often dead on arrival. And I am not sure
whether your legislation-I don't know that it is intended to, but
from my point of view, no one pays any attention to these women.
We had one Saturday night, a young female, who was stabbed in
the chest and who was stabbed so severely in the head that she required
neurosurgical treatment. I think that is a group of women who, though
not in the traditional nuclear family, this committee ought to consider.
If I have any suggestions to make to the committee, I would sug-
gest that there be adequate funds or what have you to insure that data
is compiled. I don't really think, at least from the medical community,
that we know what we are talking about. I would be glad to look at the
literature if it exists, but it does not.
Finally, I think you need to educate the health professionals. The
sensitivity to this syndrome in our emergency room, I think, is not
very high. As I queried around the country, I don't think it is high in
other emergency rooms.
That is all I have to say.
Mr. SnvroN. You have said it very well and we appreciate that testi-
mony. Itwas interesting.
If I may make an observation here, back when I was in the legisla-
ture in the State of Illinois, I sponsored a bill to outlaw professional
boxing. I discovered there was all kinds of medical research on what
happens to the brains of boxers, and, I think, properly so because it is
the one sport where we reward people for literally doing damage to
someone else's brain. "Punch drunk" is, in fact, probably the only
medical term which has become a part of the common language, or
one of the few.
But it is amazing that there is not that kind of medical data on what
is obviously a much more common problem, which you have just
touched on. I think you have given us a couple of excellent suggestions.
Let me ask two questions. No. 1, as you went through medical school,
do you ever recall this kind of problem being discussed at all?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. Medical school, residency, what have you; no, it is
not discussed now. It is not discussed in our medical school.
Mr. SmroN. Then you mentioned that the nurses say that the women
do admit tha.t they have been beaten. Do the nurses at that point rec-
ommend counseling? How is that handled?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. Our nurses are a fairly tough breed, and the first
thing. they recommend is police action, which universally is denied.
Then we try to hook them up with our social worker if it is during the
PAGENO="0048"
42
daylight hours. If it is during the evening hours, I think it is char~
acteristic of most hospitals that it is a hassle to find a social worker, and
it just becomes that we give them a source of referral to the local agen-.
cies here and pretty much leave it at that.
I can tell you we have absolutely no follow-up. I know that. We do
not know what happens to these women when they leave our doors.
Mr. SmI0N. Thank you.
Mr. Miller.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you.
I am a little bit confused by your testimony. Is the situation that
you don't know whether or not you are receiving the victims of family
violence, domestic violence, or that you are not receiving them ~
Dr. EDELSTEIN. No; I think the situation is-
Mr. MILLER. When I say "you" don't know, I mean the hospital,.
because of the manner in which the fact sheet would be written up ~
Dr. EDELSTEIN. That is correct. They are not identified.
Mr. MILLER. A crush injury is a crush injury, and your concern is.
not how the arm got broken but in setting it and getting on to the next
patient.
Dr. EDELSTEIN. That is correct.
Mr. MILLER. So your testimony is tha.t if other major hospitals are-
like your hospitals, you would not really know the number of people.
who are coming to you as a result of family violence.
Dr. EDELSTEIN. That is correct.
Mr. MILLER. You may have a little better idea with males because
you may know, either through emergency room gossip or the ambu--
lance attendants or something else, that he was shot by his wife.
Dr. EDELSTEIN. Correct.
Mr. MILLER. But again, it is not a matter of keeping rational
information.
Dr. EDELSTEIN. No.
Mr. MILLER. For a moment I thought your testimony was hopeful,.
that maybe it wasn't getting that bad that we were calling upon the
local hospitals, but it doesn't appear that that is the case. Given the.
Kansas City situation of 40,000 disturbances in progress~ I was assum-
ing that maybe we were in.tercepting some of these before they got to
the hospital, but the answer is we don't know that yet.
Dr. EDELSTEIN. The difficulty, I think, is that oftentimes the victims.
do not want this information on t.heir chart. The clearest exa.mple~ I
think, in this town is we have had instances of congressional wives who
have been beaten, who will admit that to the nurse but only upon an
agreement that this will not be written on the cha.rt, obviously because
if it ever became public it would harm the individual's livelihood or
what have you.
Mr. MILLER. I think the chairman points out an important point..
Apparently there is no sensitivity during your educational process in
becoming a doctor as to this issue. You know the problem. Some States
have mandatory laws requiring physicians to report child abuse, and-
we know there is a great deal of trouble in getting physicia.ns to do
that. But in this case there was nothing in terms of your medical back-
ground?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. I t.hink the problem goes back to data. There is no
data. You ca.nnot ask someone who is trained in a scientific fashion to
discuss something on which there is no data.
PAGENO="0049"
43
Mr. MILLER. You are drawing a distinction between medical litera-
ture and what is termed "lay" literature?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. That is correct.
Mr. MILLER. I think in drafting this legislation, we have been pre-
sented with numerous studies as to numbers but they are not neces-
sarily carried out in the confines of medical literature. I understanJ
the argument of persuasion, that doctors only listen to doctors and
lawyers only listen to lawyers and we never listen to one another.
[General laughter.]
But my concern is that I just want to make the record clear that you~
are not testifying that there is not ally literature. You are testifying
there is not any medical literature. You are not testifying there are not
any victims of family violence in major hospitals, but that you don't
know whether or not there are. I think that is important in terms of the
clarification of the record. That is all I am saying.
I appreciate your testimony. I think it is very, very important be-
cause, again, the problem may radiate to other violent situations which
we have not even yet come to appreciate. I think that is the value of
your testimony. It is very important. In fact, emergency rooms may be
the point of last resort for an awful lot of these people.
Thank you very much for your testimony.
Mr. SIMON. If I may, I don't mean to speak for the witness here, but
if I can just make one slight correction, I think that the witness is not
saying that he does not know that it occurs. In fact, he knows from.
talking to nurses that it does occur and it occurs frequently. But it is
not on the record.
Dr. EDELSTEIN. Right. They are not identifiable. That is the problem.~
Mr. MILLER. That is better stated.
Mr. SIMON. Mr. Kramer.
Mr. KRAMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Doctor, maybe I am inferring something from your testimony that
is not there, but it appears to me that you are saying that there is no
way that you as an emergency room physician from your own experi-
ences can really give us any insight into the magnitude of this prob-
lem. Is that correct?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. That is correct.
Mr. KRAMER. That a very small percentage of those people, in your
judgment, that are abused are willing to come forward and acknowl-
edge that fact.
Dr. EDELSTEIN. At least in our setting.
Mr. KRAMER. If you, or perhaps anyone else who is associated with
this bill, perhaps could give us a perspective, if that indeed be the case,.
aren't you saying to some extent that the person who is a victim or to
whom this happened has got to, at least in the first instance, act on
their own behalf, if nothing other than to seek out a remedy to their-
particular situation? And if that indeed is the case, wouldn't the same'
problems exist with the shelters and the other apparatus that this bill
potentially might provide for as a means of helping these people?
In other words, what I am saying is I am fearful only a small per-
centage would come forward.
Dr. EDELSTEIN. When they come to our emergency room, in a sense
that is a remedy they are seeking for an immediate problem for'
themselves. The fact that they do not identify themselves, at least
in an up-front manner, although they often do in a subtle manner,.
4~-914-79----4
PAGENO="0050"
44
may say something about societal approaches to the entire problem.
And if there is a better way for persons of this nature to identify
themselves, I think your bill ought to address that.
Ms. MIKuLsKI. Congressman Kramer, will you yield for a second?
Mr. KRAMER. Certainly.
Ms. MIKtTLSKI. If I could just share an experience. I think what
the physician is saying is important. They might not reveal it in that
situation because the very climate of an accident room during the
physical trauma is not one where you usually sit down and share your
personal experiences or even feel comfortable with them.
What very often happens to women is that they are in a battering
situation and then they will find out, either through someone else in
that situation or through a public service announcement on TV
about some of the programs that are available, and then they will go
where the social service is available. Then they usually are much
more open and revealing in terms of their situation, or they will tell
it to the police officer when he responds: That SOB just beat the hell
out of me.
But if they are coming into the accident room, that is not usually
the place where they will talk about their need for social services.
Am I right in outlining that?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. Yes, they usually do not. But again, I think the prob-
lem is they don't, for whatever reason, being embarrassed or fearful
of what could happen to their spouse and their own income because
they are in a Catch-22 if their spouse's income is somehow destroyed
because of this incident. Their income may be destroyed. They simply
are afraid of making this public knowledge, and they somehow view
;the accident room, if you will, as public knowledge.
Mr. KRAMER. Doctor, you also said that in your judgment, once
you were in those cases able to identify a person as being a victim
of domestic violence, that there were then adequate resources in the
community to take care of the problem. Do I understand you to have
said that or not?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. At least in our institution where we sit in Washing-
ton, those limited-and I must stress very limited-individuals who
do seek help beyond our emergency room are able to find placement
for. We have not been refused placement, to anyone's knowledge, in
my emergency room.
Mr. KRAMER. I guess that that, Mr. Chairman, in my mind raises the
question-and I would certainly be happy to hear comments on it-
does this legislation get at that problem? In other words, is the prob-
lem really one of inadequate resources being available to help people
in this situation? Or is the problem really some unwillingness or
inability on the part of the victims themselves to come forward to be
able to have a willingness to put this in the public light?
Ms. MIKULSKT. If I may follow this up and have a colloquy with our
friend from the emergency room, where do you refer the people?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. We use the Women's Legal Defense Fund. The
House of Ruth is one source.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Are you aware of the House of Ruth's financial
situation?
Dr. EDELSTEIX. Recently, yes.
PAGENO="0051"
45
Ms. MIKULSKI. And when you refer, does your staff feel a certain
security that it will be open?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. We rarely have been denied for any reason admis-
sion, if you will, to the House of Ruth.
Ms. MIKULSKI. What other services do you turn to? That is the
Defense Fund and the House of Ruth.
Dr. EDELSTEIN. That is primarily it.
Ms. MIKULSKI. What other comprehensive services are available to
the women of the District of Columbia? You have talked about one
shelter run by almost a secular nun who exists on very meager dona-
tions, and some legal services. Are there mental health services, fol-
lowup physician services, programs for the displaced homemakers,
*job counseling, babysitting services while she looks for a job or takes
training programs? What about those, Doctor?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. I am not conversant with all of this.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Mr. Kramer, those are the services that our legisla-
tion would provide, and the shelters would not be quite as shaky or
financially fragile. The House of Ruth in Washington is something
which I think you would really like to see. It has been one of the
pioneer efforts. And it is truly run in an atmosphere of unusual sacri-
flee on the part of the director, and they really do not turn people
away.
But when you go into it, you will see it is not like you are going into
the Holiday Inn. It is sparse, austere, and overcrowded. It is run on a
lot of love and very little money. So that although George Washington
has never been turned away, it is not really adequate. That one shelter
is not adequate.
Dr. EDELSTEIN. I am not making a case for adequacy or inadequacy
of facilities. All I am making a case for is that really the incidence, at
least the identifiable incidence, is so low vis-a-vis the emergency room
that we do not tax other services very much.
Ms. MIKnLsKI. But what Congressman Kramer was asking was the
availability of services. There was a certain idea conveyed in your
remarks that implied that there were comprehensive services available
to all.
Dr. EDELSTEIN. As I stated before, we have no followup. I don't
know what happens to these people and neither does anyone in my
shop, if you will, once we send them out the door. We send them to
someplace, period.
Ms. MIKULsKI. I don't want to use Mr. Kramer's time, but I will
have questions on followup myself.
Mr. SIMoN. Thank you very much, Doctor. We appreciate your
testimony and your making the effort to be here. You have made a
contribution.
Our next witness is Judge-
Ms. MIKULsKI. I am sorry. I was on Mr. Kramer's time. I didn't get
my own. May I?
Mr. SIMoN. I am sorry. Yes, you certainly may, Ms. Mikuiski. You
are not dismissed yet, Doctor.
Ms. MUOULsKI. Dr. Edelstein, please understand the tone in which
I am going to be asking you these questions. They are not directed at
you personally, but rather at you as a kind of symbol. I find that the
PAGENO="0052"
4~
comments and observations that you shared with the committee could.
indeed be shocking. That indeed in the whole field of medical lite.ra-
ture, with 10 years of study by the National Institute of Mental Health,~
etc., on this particular issue, to find nothing written about it, I find~
horrifying.
At the same time, there has been a tremendous amount of articles
written on the subject in the so-called popular press, the pencil press,
the electronic media.. My question therefore is: When these things
arise-and I am just asking about something called the culture of
medicine because your testimony reinforces the need for our bill. One
of the points that we make is that traditional institutions designed
to serve "victims" are not responsive.
Now, when all of this fury has been going on around whether these
articles have been written in popular journals and whatever, why
didn't anyone ask for the data? You see, I think the reason there is
110 data there is simply because no one thought it was important enough
to ask.
Dr. EDELSTEIN. You are probably right. I can relate my own experi-
ences, being here almost 2 years at our institution now. Frankly, no
one does ask. It becomes an incident like the one I cited before, very
dramatic, very exciting, and so forth. But once it leaves our doors,
that is it.
Ms. MIKtTLSKI. I will come back to that in a second, Doctor. But
let's just say I came into your accident room, I had a ruptured ap-
pendix or a broken leg, I fell off my moped, I truly did and no one
pushed me. Would you followup or would you just give me emergency-
treatment and send me home? Would I get a followup appointment
somewhere?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. Absolutely.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Then why don't you do it for this?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. Because the fohlowup is not within our realm or our
institution. We send the followup, if you will, to a public agency.
We do not follow up alcoholics who we send to the alcoholic center
in the District of Columbia.
Ms. MIKriLsKI. OK. Let me ask you something else. How do you
handle the issue of rape in your emergency room?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. Rape has a very high sensitivity in our institution..
My former head nurse was on the D.C. Rape Council. Everybody in
our institution is exquisitely sensitive to it, 13 out of 14 nurses are
female, and it is followed up. The social workers are gotten out of
bed in the middle of the night to come in and see the rape victim,.
and so forth.
Ms. MIKULSKI. I think that is terrific, but why is there not the sensi-
tivity to the next level?
Dr. EDELSTETN. I can't answer a why. I don't believe there is at the
spouse situation.
Ms. MIKUL5KI. I don't want to prolong the committee's time, but
it is really important for me and. I think, others to know. Someone
comes in and they are bruised and they say: I walked into the ironing
board. Is there any sensitivity to probe that a little bit further. I am.
not talking about when someone is coming in and they have a knife
sticking in their thoracic cavity. You didn't say then how did you feeL
PAGENO="0053"
47
about your mother and did you have unresolved oedipal problems.
[General laughter.]
Dr. EDELSTEIN. There is and there isn't. It is very dependent upon
the professional who is seeing the patient. You know, I think part of
the problem is-
Ms. MIKULSKI. What about the doctor? He sees the patient, too. Do
you have a sensitive staff?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. We believe we have a competent, intelligent, sensi-
tive staff. And as you know, we are a training institution.
Ms. MIKULsKI. I know. That is why I am asking this. What the hell
are you training for?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. I think your criticism may be justified, but I am not
sure how, in terms of historical perspective-you know, the battered
child syndrome was only first reported in about 1962. The battered
spouse syndrome has not really come into vogue, if you will, at least in
both the lay and professional literature, until very, very recently. It
may have been going on for 100 years, but it has only become a
syndrome-
Ms. MIKULsKI. Two thousand years.
Dr. EDELSTEIN. Well I don't know. Four thousand, maybe.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Well, I do know. If you will look at the history of
what has happened to women in the world, you can see that violence has
always been perpetuated against women in a variety of forms.
Dr. EDELSTEIN. I am not arguing that point, but I am just saying as
a syndrome, a.s a clearly defined syndrome, it is a recent phenomenon.
Ms. MIKULsicI. I have no further questions and I am sure that when
we get to the health manpower programs in my House subcommittee,
I will be very much interested in the residency and training programs
that we have on the family life we all espouse.
Thank you. And please don't misunderstand me. That is not di-
rected to you, although I hope perhaps this conversation has been a
consciousness raising one.
Dr. EDELSTEIN. It has been for my emergency room the last 2 weeks.
Mr. MILLER. How many cases have you had in the last week?
Dr. EDELSTEIN. You know, it is very odd, but we-
Ms. MIKULSKI. There were 432. [General laughter.]
Dr. EDELSTEIN. I must tell you that until the prior 6 months of this
year, there were very few, as I said, about three or four. In the last
week, we had two, which was extraordinary for us.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you vey much again, Doctor. We appreciate it.
Mr. Chairman, if I might, I would like at this point also, as one of
the authors of the legislation, to respond to the concerns of Mr. Kra-
mer, and that is this. I think, yes, there is a two-fold problem. One,
you can state that there are existing services in the community; and
two, you can say if these women would just get their act together and
change their living situation and change their lifestyle, that would be
that.
But I think clearly the test will be, as you look at the statistics of
where minimal services have been established under the name of deal-
ini~ with the problem of domestic violence, whether it is a hotline,
whether it is a counseling group, whether it is a full blown shelter with
all the attendant services, and even the cooperation of the police, that
PAGENO="0054"
48
immediately you will start receiving lnrndreds of calls a month fronr
women across that comnilmity expressing an interest in services, plead-~
ing for services or walking in the front door.
I would ask that menibers of this committee, if they have time while;
they are in the District, to go spend an evening at the House of Ruth.
There used to be another place in Arlington. There is a place in
Bethesda. Go spend an evening there and listen to one end of the phone
conversation as they tell women in desperate situations that they cannot
take them, that they are sorry, they don't know where to refer them,
or listen to women who plead to them that they have been through all
the social service establishments and have not found an answer to the
problem because what they need is a place to get away, a place of
shelter that offers anonymity to the victim.
So there is no question that there are services and that they can be
better utilized, better coordinated. And there is no question that if all
women in America could somehow change their situation when they
run into this violence in their home, that we would not need this.
But if you will talk to the victim and if you talk to the counselors
and if you talk to the people who have, been involved in this, you will
learn time and again, in areas of half a million people there are three
beds; in areas of two million people there are no beds. There are 1~
beds for 750,000 people.
The caseload is just overwhelming the services where identified for
these purposes. They may not overwhelm the emergency room. They
may not overwhelm the referrals from the emergency room to the
House of Ruth. But, my God, you are talking about someone who has
been stabbed, has had t.heir arm broken, has been thrown out of a
window, and they are saying can you give her a room for the night?
I suspect you could call almost anyone and get that service.
But when you have a voice on the other end of the phone saving~
"I have just been beaten, can I bring my three chilciren clown," and
they say, "I'm sorry, we are fulL" I think that is the issue you have got
to pit the legislation against. I think with cursory looking in any com-
munity in America, you will find an overwhelming need. That need
is a tragic statement of many, many problems in our society, but the
need is real.
I think that it is too easy to suggest that it is easy for people. I have
many friends who are going through divorces and separations and
all of tile various phases you go through, and one of the very mterestmg
demands is tile husband insists that the. wife not express any of this
to any of her friends, not tell anybody else that they are going through
this problem.
Now, escalate that to the battering and see what the husband's
threats in that case are. So it is not quite so easy. Time and again you
will have victims who tell you they went to their friend's house aucl
so did tile husband about 10 minutes later, and he took on everybody
in that family.
So I think the situation we are talking about ilere, and maybe, more
importantly, tile fact that it can be anonymous, tlla.t you don't end up
in a social welfare record, that you don't end up in the county hospital
records as to your problems, but you can sit down u-itll sonIc anonymity
and talk to people who understand is the attractiveness and magnetism
of this service.
PAGENO="0055"
49
Clearly, the statistics point out that where it is established and
where the number becomes known, when the little ad flashes on the
TV late at night here for the House of Ruth, their phone rings. I think
that is the kind of data you are going to have to deal with in terms of
considering this legislation.
Thank you.
Mr. SIMoN. Our next witness is Judge George Herbert Goodrich of
the Superior Court, the Family Division.
Judge Goodrich, we welcome you.
[Prepared statement of Judge Goodrich follows:]
STATEMENT OF JUDGE GEORGE HERBERT Goonnicu, FAMILY DIVISION HEAD~
SUPERIoR COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity of being presented this morning~
to address a few words to the subcommittee regarding domestic violence, as
viewed from the perspective of the judicial system.
The courts in the District of Columbia presently encounter these domestic yb-
lence cases in two ways:
1. As criminal prosecutions initiated by the United States Attorney's Office.
2. As petitions for civil protection orders brought by the Corporation Counsel.
Formerly, the United States Attorney's Office would "paper" only one or two
cases every six months; currently they process one or two a week. There has
been some question raised concerning the alleged reluctance of the United States
Attorney's Office to prosecute these cases. The United States Attorney's Office
maintains that it prosecutes all cases which merit prosecution; historically, the
prosecutors have found that many complaining witnesses "sign off" on these
cases, refusing to go forward with the prosecution.
Instances of domestic violence come to the attention of the United States
Attorney's Office as a result of the arrest of the attacker or through referral
from the Citizen's Complaint Center. The Center is an intake and referral
service which has been in operation since the District of Columbia Court Reform
and Criminal Procedure Act of 1970. The Center indicates that they process
some 9,000 domestic violence complaints a year. Employees of the United States
Attorney's Office and of the District of Columbia city government staff the
Center which makes community referrals for shelter and counseling, referrals
to the United States Attorney's Office for criminal prosecution, and referrals to
the Corporation Counsel, representing the District of Columbia, for petitions
* seeking civil protection orders. The Citizen's Complaint Center also arranges
informal hearings with attorneys or paralegals from the United States Attor-
ney's Office at which the parties can express their grievances.
The number of petitions filed by the Corporation Counsel for civil protection
orders has declined in recent years-818 in 1976, 815 in 1977, and 698 in 1978.
This decline is not indicative of a decrease in domestic violence however, but of
staff shortages in the office of the Corporation Counsel and of other logistical
problems in the processing of petitions, that is, backlogs in court and at the
Citizen's Complaint Center. Other problems regarding the civil protection orders
include the length of the court process required to obtain them, three or four
weeks, and the fact that they are not enforceable by the police. The Corporation
Counsel actually issues more warning letters than petitions for civil protection
orders.
These procedures are receiving much needed attention as the community, as a
whole, is becoming more aware of this problem of domestic violence. It is my
feeling that, as this attention increases, it will cause the various organizations
involved to re-examine their procedures. For example, the police have instituted
a Family Disturbance Intervention Program which they believe will protect
their officers from injury or death while responding to family disturbance calls
as well as improving their service to the victims of domestic violence.
Underlying the problem is the additional difficulty of acquiring meaningful
statistics since it is believed that only a small percentage of beating cases are
reported. This fact notwithstanding however, it is very clear that there is a
great need for shelter homes for these unfortunate victims and/or their children.
Regardless of which proposed bill is favored, it is necessary to consider the
availability of shelter care for a three to four week period, rather than the
PAGENO="0056"
50
present one week to ten days average in the District of Columbia. Counseling
and therapy for these victims are requisites.
Facilities should include appropriate accommodations and services for any
children who might accompany their mother. In many cases the children's
needs will be as severe as the mother's since they may have been involved in
the abuse as well, emotionally and/or physically.
Shelter homes should provide some form of security to protect the wife from
further abuse by the husband while she resides therein.
The courts encounter examples of domestic violence in two other areas, that is,
child abuse or neglect cases, and in some contested divorce cases. Again, there is
xeason to believe that not all instances of violence are reported. Shelter homes
might well be utilized in these cases as well.
It is heartening indeed to note the committee's work in this critical area, and
I am grateful to have had a chance to appear before you this morning. Thank
`ou.
STATEMENT OP HON. GEORGE HERBERT GOODRICH, ASSOCIATE
JUDGE OP THE SUPERIOR COURT OP THE DISTRICT OP COLUMBIA,
HEAD OP THE PAMILY DIVISION
Judge GooDRIcH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity
of being present this morning to address a few words to the subcom-
mittee regarding domestic violence as viewed from the perspective of
the judicial system.
Courts in the District of Columbia presently encounter these domes-
tic violence cases in two ways: as a criminal prosecution initiated by
the u.S. Attorney's Office; and second, as petitions for civil protection
orders brought by the Corporation Counsel. Formerly the U.S. Attor-
ney's Office would pay for only one or two cases every 6 months. Cur-
rently they process one or two a week.
There has been some question raised concerning the alleged re-
luctance of the U.S. Attorney's Office to prosecute these cases. The U.S.
Attorney's Office maintains that it prosecutes all cases which merit
prosecution. Historically the prosecutors have found that many com-
plaining witnesses sign off on these cases, refusing to go forward with
the prosecution.
Instances of domestic violence come to the attention of the U.S. At-
torney's Office as a result of the arrest of the attacker or through re-
ferral from the Citizen's Complaint Center. The center has an intake
and referral service which has been in operation since the District of
Columbia Court Reform and Criminal Procedure Act of 1970.
The center indicates that they process some 9.000 domestic violence
complaints a year. Employees of the U.S. Attorney's Office and of the
District of Columbia city government staff the center, which makes
community referrals for shelter and counseling, referrals to the U.S.
Attorney's Office for criminal prosecution, and referral's to the Cor-
poration Counsel's Office representing the District of Columbia for
petitions seeking civil protection orders.
The Civil Complaint Center also arranges informal hearings with
attorneys or paralegals from the U.S. Attorney's Office, at which the
parties can express their grievances. The number of petitions filed by
the Corporation Counsel for civil protection orders has declined in
recent years. There were 818 in 1976, 815 in 1977. a.nd 693 in 1978.
This decline is not indicative of a decrease in domestic violence. how-
ver, but of staff shortages in the offices of the Corporation Counsel and.
PAGENO="0057"
51
of other logistical problems in the processing of petitions such as
backlogs in court and at the Citizen's Complaint Center.
Other problems regarding the civil protection orders include the
length of the court process required to obtain them, 3 to 4 weeks, and
the fact that they are not enforceable by the police. The Corporation
Counsel actually issues more warning letters than petitions for civil
protection orders. These procedures are receiving much-needed atten-
tion as the community as a whole is becoming more aware of this prob-
1cm of domestic violence.
It is my feeling that as this attention increases it will cause the
various organizations involved to reexamine their procedures. For
example, the police have instituted a family disturbance intervention
program which they believe will protect their officers from injury or
death while responding to family disturbance calls, as well as im-
proving their service to the victims of domestic violence.
Underlying the problem is an additional difficulty of acquiring
meaningful statistics, since it is believed that only a small percentage
of beating cases are reported. This fact notwithstanding, however, it
is very clear that there is a great need for shelter homes for these
unfortunate victims and/or their children.
Regardless of which proposed bill is favored, it is necessary, it
seems to me, to consider the availability of shelter care for a 3- to 4-
week period rather than the present 1-week to 10-day average stay
in the District of Columbia at this time.
Counseling and therapy for these victims are requisites. Facilities
should include appropriate accommodations and services for any
children who might accompany their mother. In many cases the chil-
dren's needs will be as severe as the mother's since they may have been
involved in the abuse as well, emotionally or physically.
Shelter homes should provide some form of security to protect
the wife from further abuse from the husband while she resides
therein.
Finally, courts encounter additional examples of domestic violence
in two other areas: child abuse and neglect cases and in some con-
tested divorce cases. Again, there is reason to believe that not all'
instances of violence are reported. Shelter homes might well be util~
izeci in these cases as well.
It is heartening, indeed, to note the committee's work in this criti-
cal area, and I am grateful to have had a chance to make this state-
ment to the committee at this time.
Mr. MILLER (presiding). Thank you very much for your statement.
You have said a couple of times in your statement that there is
some question as to the number of cases which are actually reported,.
and it is believed that the instance is underreported.
Judge GOODRICH. Right.
Mr. MILLER. I assume that you have handled cases that have actually
gone to the full prosecution.
Judge GOODRICH. In two ways, yes, sir. Civil protection orders are
sought by the battered wife through the court. You rule on those, you
listen to her statement of what hanpened. and then you issue them or
not, depending if they follow through to that point of having such a
civil protection order issued, they are serious about it and remain
PAGENO="0058"
so. Sometimes the cases do not even get to court. They may have
been filed but they have not been granted a hearing and they wash out.
We see it also in a different area, and that is the area of child
abuse. The statistics indicate there were 502 cases of child abuse and/or
neglect in 1978 in the District of Columbia. There is a very subtle
difference between these two. Abuse, of course, would be physical
violence to the child. It could be psychological and psychiatric,
whereas neglect is the failure to produce needed services or to take
care of the child in that way.
That is a long answer to your question.
Mr. MILLER. No, it is not. It is important.
Let me ask you. First of all, in the civil protection orders, before
that order is issued, it comes before you or another member of the
Family Division, at which time you listen to the evidence on which the
order should be issued.
Judge GOODRICH. Yes, sir.
Mr. MILLER. Let me ask you something about that evidence. Again we
are sort of looking for that profile. Is it a large number of cases in
which the testimony is this is a first time and it is unacceptable, or is
it the testimony that this has happened repeatedly but this time I want
protection?
My concern is: Is the victim whom you now have before the bench
testifying as to a long history of beatings and abuse, or is this a first-
time case?
Judge G00DRICI-I. My experience has been that in almost three-
quarters or seven-eighths of the circumstances that appear, it is a con-
tinuous situation. It is not a one-time situation. Very rarely do they
come in after one beating. And they describe that this has gone on
before.
Mr. MILLER. Have they described that they have sought out other
methods to mitigate the situation?
Judge GooDRICH. Not as a rule. This comes before the court in a
written report claim, and it gives a basic, almost medical report of the
alleged degree of beating and what happened as a result of it and so
forth and so on. Sometimes there may be reference to the fact that it
was necessary the victim be hospitalized and receive so many stitches
and things of that nature.
Mr. MILLER. But has the victim moved out of the house previously?
Has the victim tried to stay at a friend's house? Is that a part of this
in determining whether or not-
Judge GooDmcH. As a. rule, that may or may not be gone into. Gen-
erally I would say it is not because you are dealing with a given situa.-
tion in front of you. You are making a ruling as to whether or not to
issue an order directing that he cease and desist that particular type
of conduct.
Mr. MILLER. In the situation where the case goes to criminal prose-
cution, you would not necessarily handle that. You would not handle
~that?
Judge GooDRIcH. Our court does handle that.
Mr. MILLER. It does handle that. What is the situation there in terms
of the average testimony as to previous occurrences of abuse and length
of time staying in the abusive situation?
PAGENO="0059"
53
Judge GOODRICH. In that situation, those facts would be gone into
to develop the history and background situation and to show what
efforts the abused person had undertaken in an effort to handle the
problem by herself or himself.
Mr. MILLER. What do you find? Have they made those efforts?
Judge GOODRICH. They have tried to.
Mr. MILLER. Has the abuse reoccurred over a period of years prior
to this time?
Judge GooDRIcH. Generally, yes.
Mr. MILLER. In the case, now, you have mentioned you also see it
come up in the question of child abuse cases. There are you talking
about, again, in tile prosecution for child abuse or for a protection
order, or both?
Judge GooDRICh. Probably both. When I refer to child abuse cases,
I was talking about those cases which come in on an allegation of child
abuse alone. Sometimes that develops.
Mr. MILLER. That is what I am saying. In the testimony around the
prosecution for child abuse or in the seeking of a civil protection order,
does the testimony in some instances also relate there is abuse of other
members of that family, whether it is other children or a spouse?
Judge GOODRICH. Yes, sir. Yes, sir, that would come out.
Mr. MILLER. I am just trying to determine because you have access,
unlike the doctor who may not have access, to the background of the
incident. You have access because obviously there has to be some expla-
nation why you want to invoke either the civil or criminal law.
My concern is, in garnering evidence which would lead us to want to
pass this legislation, it is my belief-and I am asking whether it is
borne out-that by the time a person comes to court or ends up in the
operating room or comes to a shelter, that there is a history there; that
this is not someone who is simply mad at their husband or wife. There
is a history. There is also an endurance factor that is beyond me, but it
is there in terms of living with that situation.
I am trying to develop whether that is true. It may be my belief
and it may not be valid.
Judge GOODRICH. Yes, that is true. In cases of child abuse, often-
times the report you will be handed indicates there have been previous
beatings, that there has been another court case involving the child's
older brother or sister also having been abused.
This does flow forward. I think my experience is such that it would
buttress the position you have just outlined, which is this is not a one-
tinTle "I am mad at you" type of thing and "I will dash down to court,"
and that whatever efforts and facilities might have been available will
have been tried, whether it is to urge another family member to try to
counsel the beater, whether it is to attempt to get marriage counseling,
whether it is seeing the minister or clergy. I think in many cases, much
of that will have been done prior to it getting to us.
In many respects we, as I view it, are kind of the last stop on this
line too, as the doctor referred to the fact that when it gets to him,
that is the end point of the violence. When it gets to court, our experi-
*ence has been that they will have tried other things, vainly perhaps,
but in an effort.
PAGENO="0060"
54
Mr. MILLER. So you would say that it is a fair assumption that by
the time people get into civil prosecution, criminal prosecution, that
they have made an effort.
Judge GOODRICH. I would think so, yes, sir.
Mr. MILLER. To change their circumstance to some degree.
Judge GOODRICH. Yes, sir.
Mr. MILLER. However they have done that.
In the case where it is cross-referenced as a child abuse case and then
you learn of the battering of another individual in the family, whether
it is another child or a spouse, is there testimony as to whether or not
the defendant has been a battered individual or not? Is that brought
out in terms of court reports or is that just speculation?
Judge GOODRICH. There may be some bearing.
Mr. MILLER. We know it from ot.her studies, but do you see it in your
courtroom, is what I am asking.
Judge GOODRICH. During the trial of criminal charges against a
batterer?
Mr. MILLER. Yes.
Judge GOODRICH. The government would attempt to bring out the
fact that other people in the family had been battered. Now, whether
or not tha.t gets into the record, the defense attorney may say, well, we
are just talking about this situation here. But the social reports on the
children would include reference to other situations as a part of devel-
oping a profile.
Mr. MILLER. Let me ask you this. Again, since you have more access
in terms of verbal testimony and background testimony before you
issue a civil protection order or criminal prosecution. how would you
define the person pressing the charges, the victim? Are they reluctant?
What is their situation when they are in your court? Police officers
many times will tell you-I think this is changing to some degree, but
they will say they don't want to write up the report because the
woman will never show up in court anyway. that she will never be
there on Monday morning ~he.n it is time to press charges, so it is
wasted time. That is obviously changing in some areas now.
But again, you see the victim at a point when they have made a
clear-cut decision to go ahead with either civil protection or criminal
prosecution, and I just wondered about the state. of mind of that
witness in terms of fear or reluctance or what have, you, if on feel
competent to testify.
Judge G00DRICI-I. I can make several comments about this. Obvi-
ously, this is a very uncomfortable position for the con~lainant to
be in. It is very uncomfortable for many reasons. It can be a. threat
economically. It can result in additional physical threats, perhaps. So
that it takes a good deal of stick-to-itiveness to, having made the
complaint, follow through with it.
Cases that go that way are built upon determination by the. victim to
see it through. Some do drop by the. wayside for various reasons. In
the child abuse cases, it is not unusual to have the parent who has clone
the abusing to then buy candy or toys for the child and say: Look,
you know, it really wasn't as serious as it seemed. They attempt to win
the child over.
PAGENO="0061"
55
Those are difficult cases because many times they succeed. A child
will not take the stand and describe what has happened to him or her.
It is a little difficult to give a straight out answer.
Mr. MILLER. Yes, I understand. rfliaflk you very much.
Mr. Kramer.
Mr. KRAMER. I have no questions.
Mr. MILLER. Barbara.
Ms. MIKTJL5KI. Judge Goodrich, I would like to thank you for your
supporting testimony to our efforts. In your testimony you comment
about the need for shelters, which we appreciate. Our legislation
would also talk about more comprehensive services, either the direct
provision or the referral to other services, one of which would be those
who would help women to be much more economically self~supporting.
Judge GOODRICH. Yes.
Ms. MIKUL5icI. Do you see that as an important thing; not only a
place to catch a breath, but also the availability of other services, sir?
Judge GOODRICH. I certainly do. Otherwise, it becomes a very much
needed temporary place that they can go and receive a period of peace
while they attempt to pull themselves together. But it seems to me they
will need professional help and counseling and therapy in doing that,
and I think tha.t is a very vital part of what you have proposed. So I
would be very much in favor of it.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Thank you. I always thought Federal judges wore
powdered wigs.
Judge GOODRICH. Not in Washington in the summer. [General
laughter.]
Mr. MILLER. Thank you very much for your testimony.
Judge GOODRICH. Thank you.
Mr. MILLER. Next we will hear from a panel of Capt. Patricia Hal-
sey, from the Marine Corps in Camp Pendleton, Calif., and Lt. Serge
Doucette, who is from Bureau of Medicine and Surgery for the Navy,
amId the head of the Family Advocacy Branch.
[Prepared statement of Lt. (jg.) Serge H. Doucette, Jr., follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF LT. (rG.) SERGE R. DOUCETTE, JR., MEDICAL SERVICE CORPS,
U.S. NAVY RESERVE, HEAD, FAMILY ADVOCACY PROGRAM, BUREAU OF MEDICINE
AND SURGERY, DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
I am Lt. jg.) Serge R. Doucette Jr., Medical Service Corps. United States
Navy Reserve, Head, Family Advocacy Program, Bureau of Medicine and Sur-
gery, Department of the Navy. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before
YOU today to discuss the Navy Medical Department's Family Advocacy Program.
In keeping with its mission of supporting the operational forces, one of the
Navy Medical Department's objectives is to promote an environment and de-
velop methods that enhance the maintenanca of healthy individuals and families,
and, when identified, eliminate dysfunction and restore to health those individuals
and families experiencing the symptoms associated with abuse. neglect, sexual
assault, or rape. The Family Advocacy Program is geared toward the "Preserva-
tion and Promotion of Our Most Important `Natural Resource'-People."
Family Advocacy is an outgrowth of the Navy Medical Department's spouse
abuse reporting and child advocacy programs.
In 1977, the Federal Register was revised to reflect the Spouse Abuse Program
and the new title of Family Advocacy. This revision also changed the Central
Child Abuse and Neglect Registry to a Central Family Advocacy Registry, in-
corporating all forms of abuse and neglect. Although the program was re-
named, impact at the local level was minimal.
PAGENO="0062"
56
Each command, in the absence of a combined instruction, continued to manage
its Child and Spouse Abuse Programs separately. This was anticipated, and
following the Federal Register revision, a Pilot Family Advocacy Program was
established at Naval Regional Medical Centers San Diego, CA; Camp Pendleton,
CA; Camp Lejeune, NC; and Portsmouth, VA. The objective of the pilot program
was to develop methods necessary to formulate a comprehensive program that
would become applicable to all Navy Medical Department activities. The existing
and pilot programs were monitored and modified in a continual effort to meet
the needs of our military members and families. Military and civilian resources,
along with research and statistical data were utilized to develop a combined
effort pertaining to child abuse and neglect, spouse abuse and neglect, sexual
assault, and rape.
Many factors must be considered in the formation of any program. The
following is only a partial accounting of the factors considered in the formation
of the Navy's Family Advocacy Programs:
(1) There is specific state and federal legislation pertaining to child abuse
and neglect.
(2) There is no federal legislation specifically addressing spouse abuse and
neglect.
(3) Child abuse and neglect legislation excludes all abuse, neglect, and assault
that is not perpetrated by a parent, guardian or other individual or agency
charged with the care of the child.
(4) There are no national standards applicable to child or spouse abuse and
neglect at this time.
(5) There are few programs designed for the sensitive handling or treatment
of those sexually assaulted or raped.
(C) There is a high correlation between spouse and child abuse and neglect.
(7) A program based solely on the concept of "domestic violence" would ex-
clude nonmarried or nonfamily members.
(5) There are inadequate numbers of civilian treatment facilities or "shelters"
necessary to provide crisis assistance.
(9) There is a high correlation between drug and alcohol abuse and domestic
violence, sexual assault, and rape.
(10) It is knowm that not all cases of child or spouse abuse and neglect, sexual
assault, or rape are reported. Consequently, the extent of these incidents sug-
gested by actual reports underrepresent the actual incidence.
(11) Etiological factors and incident rate are basically the same in the mili-
tary and civilian communities. However, there are psychological, environmental,
and occupational factors which are unique in military families (e.g., unantici-
pated and frequent separations, isolated military stations, adaptation to foreign
countries, etc.) that are contributing to the overall military problem.
(12) Abuse, neglect, sexual assault, and rape are observed to cross socio-
economic boundaries and military hierarchies.
Recognition of these and other factors, together with the knowledge gained
from the child, spouse, and related pilot programs have resulted in the current
Navy Family Advocacy Program. The program elements and format of the
Family Advocacy Program are available for your information.
Continuing to strive for program improvement, the Navy Medical Department
ha~s supported the Tn-service Child Advocacy Committee. The Navy's program
manager for Family Advocacy is investigating, with the other services, methods,
and procedures which will result in the reduction of individual and family
problems. This committee is currently tasked with the development of a draft
Department of Defense Family Advocacy Directive.
The Family Advocacy Program interfaces with all applicable military and
civilian agencies, as evidenced by current activity with: the Tni-service Child
Advocacy Committee; the President's Committee on Domestic Violence: the Na-
tional Center on Child Abuse and Neglect; the newly formed Navy Family Serv-
ices Program; the Navy Judge Advocate General; the Navy's Substance Abuse
Program; and the Office of Naval Research.
It has been the knowledge obtained from the Child Advocacy, Spouse Abuse,
and related pilot programs that has led to the development of a comprehensive
Family Advocacy Program, including all aspects of: abuse, neglect, sexual as-
sault, and rape. Nonmarried service members are considered to be a part of an
extended Navy family, requiring the same concern and support as married service
members and their dependents who comprise the more traditional view of family.
The etiology of abuse, neglect, sexual assault and rape is multifaceted, as are the
PAGENO="0063"
factors that support the maintenance of, or recurrence of, such behavior. These
acts are interpersonal and as such are viewed as occurring in dynamic systems.
requiring intervention of all concerned. This form of behavior, and its conse-
quences must be treated from within the system in which it operates, whether it
be the traditional family unit, or the extended Navy family, and it must encom-
pass the larger system, society. Our program is desgined to be a functional part
of an overall individual and family services program (military and civilian).
The Navy Medical Department's Family Advocacy Program is designed to ac-
complish its objectives through a comprehensive prevention, identification, inter-
vention, treatment and follow-up program. It is being partially implemented at
local command levels within the constraints of military and civilian resources.
A need for additional resources to fully implement the program is recognized.
Cordination with existing and future military and civilian resources is the foun-
dation for local implementation of the Family Advocacy Program at this time.
As this program becomes fully operational, it can be expected that increased
numbers of individuals and families that require some form of treatment, sup-
port, or intervention will be identified. Effective implementation of the program
will continue to increase the burden on existing military and civilian resources.
The Navy Medical Department is endeavoring to obtain additional fiscal and
staffing support for the Family Advocacy Program through the formal budgetary
process. The civilian communities as well must be prepared to respond with any
additional requisite support. The Family Advocacy implementing instruction, in-
cluding a detailed procedure manual, is in final stages of review prior to the
Surgeon General's signature. Prompt distribution of the instruction, after signa-
ture, is expected to result in the initial implementation of the program in a
minimal time.
This concludes my statement. I appreciate your time and interest. I stand
ready to respond to your questions.
FAMILY ADVOCACY: PROGRAM ELEMENTS AND FORMAT
PROGRAM ELEMENTS
1: Identification:
(a) Identification of abused, neglected, sexually assaulted, or raped
individuals.
(b) Identification of abuser/neglector
(c) Gathering of information regarding a suspected incident of child or spouse
abuse/neglect in order to confirm or deny diagnosis of maltreatment.
(d) Identification of "high risk" individuals and families.
2. Physical protection of the abused/neglected
3. Medical and emotional treatment of the abused, neglected, sexually as-
saulted, or raped individual, as well as the perpetrator and all others directly
concerned in the incident.
4. Interfacing with military and civilian resources, resulting in the obtain-
ing for the patient, and all concerned, necessary support or ancillary interven-
tion which is required in abuse, neglect, sexual assault, or rape cases.
5. Maintenance of a Central Registry for the following reasons:
(a) Case management, incident rate analysis, system monitoring.
(b) Sharing of information in accordance with provisions of the Federal
Register:
(1) With other armed services medical departments;
(2) With other military agencies for control of detailing to insure ade-
quate treatment facilities are available at proposed duty stations; and
(3) With military and civilian child protection/welfare agencies.
(e) Identification and ameliorating services to individuals and families
(this may involve decisions regarding transfers, duty assignments, humani-
tarian discharges, etc.).
PROGRAM FORMAT
The medical model of primary, secondary, and tertiary levels of interven-
tion is a useful model for conceptualizing treatment and prevention programs.
Family Advocacy incorporates all three levels in the following outline:
1. Tertiary intervention
Tertiary is after-the-fact intervention directed to individuals and families
m which abuse, neglect, sexual assault, or rape has occurred.
PAGENO="0064"
58
(a) Actions.-Representatives of the Family Advocacy Program develop a
working knowledge of the full range of available treatment resources through-
out the military and civilian community and this is utilized to maximize their
efforts in providing or securing support and treatment services for military
members and families experiencing the effects of abuse, neglect, sexual assault,
or rape.
(b) Rationale.-The precusers to, and the effects of, abuse, neglect, sexual
assault or rape are multifaceted and intervention in such instances requires a
carefully-developed treatment plan that addresses all of the identified problems.
For example, in cases of familial abuse or neglect, it may be determined that
the abuse/neglect is secondary to other problems and that intervention should
focus on the primary problems while assuring the protection and safety of the
victim.
2. Secon dary intervention
Secondary intervention (prevention) programs are directed to individuals and
families that have been identified as "high risk," but have not yet experienced
abusive or neglecting behavior. Services and programs are geared toward as-
sisting these individuals and families to overcome areas of dysfunction which
place them into a "high risk" category.
(a) Action.-Secondary intervention (prevention) programs are continually
developing methods which lead to the identification of "high risk" individuals
and families. Once identified, every effort is used to administer or obtain re-
quired assistance for the individual or family in order to eliminate the factors
which place them at risk.
(b) Rationale-Progress which succeeded in returning individuals and fam-
ilies to adequate levels of functioning before they experience abuse or neglect,
increase the availability of resources to the community by avoiding the require-
ment of using extensive resources to intervene after crisis.
~. Primary intervention
Primary intervention (prevention) programs are directed to the general popu-
lation with the intent of assisting individuals and families to maintain adequate
levels of functioning.
(a) Action-Family Advocacy Representatives identify target groups and work
collaboratively with civilian and military Family Services Programs in the de-
velopment and implementation of a full range of education programs.
(b) Rationals.-It costs less and is more effective to keep people well than to
help them to get better. Additionally, there is immeasurable loss to society in
every respect when an individual or family drops from adequate levels of
functioning. Primary intervention helps to preserve and promote our most im-
portant "national resource"-People.
STATEMENT OF CAPT. PATRICIA HALSEY, U.S. MARINE CORPS; AND
LT. (jg.) SERGE R. DOUCETTE, SR., BUREAU OF MEDICINE AND
SURGERY FOR THE NAVY, HEAD OF FAMILY ADVOCACY PRO-
GRAM
Mr. MILLER. Your statements will be entered in the record in their
entirety, and you are free to proceed in any manner in which you
would like. You may either summarize them or put them in.
Captain HALSEY. Mr. Miller, the two of us will be presenting the
Navy and Marine Corps combined effort in this, and we will begin
with Lieutenant Doucette explaining the Navy's participation through
the medical field.
Lieutenant DOUOETTE. I have a statement which I will read from.
I am Lt. (jg) Serge R. Doucette, Jr., Medical Service Corps, U.S.
Navy Reserve, Head, family advocacy program, Bureau of Medicine
and Surgery, Department of the Navy. I appreciate the opportunity
to appear before you today to discuss the Navy Medical Department's
family advocacy program.
PAGENO="0065"
59
In keeping with its mission of supporting the operational forces,
one of the Navy Medical Department's objectives is to promote an
environment .and develop methods that enhance the maintenance of
healthy individuals and families, and, when identified, eliminate dys-
function and restore to health those individuals and families experi-
encing the symptoms associated with abuse, neglect, sexual assault,
or rape.
The family advocacy program is geared toward the preservation
and promotion of our most important natural resource, people. Family
advocacy is an outgrowth of the Navy Medical Department's spouse
abuse reporting and child advocacy programs.
In 1977, the Federal Register was revised to reflect the spouse abuse
program and the new title of Family Advocacy. This revision also
changed the Central Child Abuse and Neglect Registry to a Central
Family Advocacy Registry, incorporating all forms of abuse and
neglect.
Although the ~)rogram was renamed, impact at the local level was
minimal. Each command, in the absence of a combined instruction,
continued to manage its child and spouse abuse programs separately.
This was anticipated, and following the Federal Register revision, a
iilot family advocacy program was established at Naval Regional
~1edical Centers. San Diego, Calif., Camp Pendleton, Calif., Camp
Lej eune, N.C., and Portsmouth, Va.
The objective of the pilot program was to develop methods neces-
sary to formu'ate a comprehensive program that would become appli-
cable to all Navy Medical Department activities. The existing and
pilot programs were monitored and modified in a continual effort to
meet the needs of our military members and families.
Military and civilian resources, along with research and statistical
data, were utilized to develop a combined effort pertaining to child
abuse and neglect, spouse abuse and neglect, sexual assault, and rape.
Many factors must be considered in the formation of any program.
The following is only a partial accounting of the factors considered
in the formation of the Navy's family advocacy program.
(1) There is specific State and Federal legislation pertaining to
child abuse and neglect.
(2) There is no Federal legislation specifically addressing spouse
abuse and neglect.
(3) Child abuse and neglect legislation excludes all abuse, neglect,
and assault that is not perpetrated by a parent, guardian, or other
individual or agency charged with the care of the child.
(4) There are no national standards applicable to child or spouse
abuse and neglect at this time.
(5) There are few programs designed for the sensitive handling
or treatment of those sexually assaulted or raped.
(6) There is a high correlation between spouse and child abuse and
neglect.
(7) A program based solely on the concept of "domestic violence"
would exclude nonmarriecl or nonfarnily members.
(8) There are inadequate numbers of civilian treatment facilities
or shelters necessary to provide crisis assistance.
(9) There is a high correlation between drug and alcohol abuse and
domestic violence, sexual assault, and rape.
49-914-79---5
PAGENO="0066"
60
(10) It is known that not all cases of child or spouse abuse and
neglect, sexual assault or rape are reported. Consequently, the extent
of these incidents suggested by actual reports underrepresent the
actual incidence.
(11) Etiological factors and incident rate are basically the same
in the military and civilian communities. However, there are psycho-
logical, environmental, and occupational factors which are unique in
military families (e.g., unanticipated and frequent separations, iso-
lated military stations, adaptation to foreign countries, et cetera)
that are contributing to the overall military problem.
(12) Abuse, neglect, sexual assault, and rape are observed to cross
socioeconomic boundaries and military hierarchies.
Recognition of these and other factors, together with the knowledge
gained from the child, spouse, and related pilot programs, have
resulted in the current Navy family advocacy program. The program
elements and format of the family advocacy program are available
for your information.
Continuing to strive for program improvement, the Navy Medical
Department has supported the Tn-service Child Advocacy Committee.
The Navy's program manager for family advocacy is investigating,
with the other services, methods and procedures which will result in
the reduction of individual and family problems. This committee is
currently tasked with the development of a draft Department of
Defense Family Advocacy Directive.
The family advocacy program interfaces with all applicable mili-
tary and civilian agencies, as evidenced by current activity with the
Tn-service Child Advocacy Committee, the President's Committee on
Domestic Violence, the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect,
the newly-formed Navy family services program, the Navy Judge
Advocate General, the Navy's substance abuse program, and the Office
of Naval Research.
It has been the knowledge obtained from the child advocacy, spouse
abuse, and related pilot programs that has led to the development of
a comprehensive family advocacy program, including all aspects of
abuse, neglect., sexual assault, and rape. Nonmarried service members
are considered to be a part of an extended Navy family requiring the
same concern and support as married service members and their
dependents, who comprise the more traditional view of family.
The etiology of abuse, neglect, sexual assault, and rape is multi-
faceted, as are the factors that support the maintenance of or recur-
rence of such behavior. These acts are interpersonal and. as such, are
viewed as occurring in dynamic systems requiring intervention of all
concerned.
This form of behavior and its consequences must be treated from
within the system in which it. operates, whether it be the traditional
family unit or the extended Navy famil . and it must encompass the
larger system, society. Our program is designed to be a functional part
of an overall individual and family services program (military and
civilian').
The Navy Medical Department's family advocacy program is de-
signed to accomplish its objectives through a comprehensive preven-
tion, identification, intervention, treatment and followup program.
PAGENO="0067"
61
It is being partially implemented at local command levels within the
constraints of military and' civilian, resources.
A need for additional resources to fully implement `the program
is recognized. Coordination with~ existing and future military and civil-
ian resources is the foundation for local'implernentation of the family
advocacy program atthis time.
As this program becomes fuily'operational, it can be expected that
increased numbers of individuals and families that require some form
of treatment, support or intervention will be identified. Effective im-
plementation of the program will continue `to increase the burden on
existing military and civilian resources. The Navy Medical Depart-
ment. is endeavoring to obtain additional `fiscal and staffing support for
the family advocacy program `through the formal budgetary process.
The civilian communities as well must be prepared to respond with
any additional requisite support. The family advocacy implementing
instruction, including a detailed procedure manual, is in final stages of
review prior to the Surgeon General's signature. Prompt distribution
of the~ instruction, after signature, is expected to result in the initial
implementation of the program in a minimal time.
This concludes my statement. I appreciate your time and interest.
I stand ready to respond to your questions.
Mr. MILLER. Thank von very much.
Captain HALSEY. I am Captain Patricia Halsey. I am a member of
the State bar in California, and my interest in the subject and work
in this subject has been as an attorney in Camp Pendleton, Calif.,
where I have had clients who are victims of domestic violence.
At Camp Pendleton it has come to our awareness that there is domes-
tic violence in one of seven ways. If the victim and family live on the
base, oftentimes the victim or a neighbor will call the Provost Mar-
shall's office and the man will either be put in the barracks for the
evening or the violent situation will have calmed down by the time the
Provost Marshall arrives there.
Presently we have two investigators who are working in this area,
and during the last 6 months they have responded to 188 calls in a
population of 13,000. if the family lives off base, they oftentimes call
the local l?olice department. Again, the local police department has
the same problem of separating the family, as they would in any
civilian family.
The victim may seek medical attention. Lieutenant Doucette told
you that we have a reporting system through the medical system, the
naval hospitals. In 1918 there were 943 cases reported to all naval hos-
pitals throughout the world on spouse abuse specifically. The victim
may seek the aid of a chaplain. At that point, the chaplain gives pas-
toral counseling if that is desired, or helps with the problem to the
extent he can.
The victim may come to legal assistance. That is where I have been
involved. Oftentimes the victims are saying what can I do legally.
California has a statute where a restraining order can be issued against
the man without filing for a dissolution. That oftentimes is a problem.
The victim may be coming to me to file for dissolution or separation.
Another way is going to a local shelter. Some of our victims who
live out of town and on board base will contact the local shelter know-
PAGENO="0068"
62
ing this is the area of expertise they can assist the victim in. And
sometimes the victims will go directly to the commanding officer, hop-
ing that the commanding officer can help in some way with solving the
problem at home, counseling her husband, perhaps changing a situa-
tion that may be causing the problem.
One of the main problems we encountered as I began working in
this area was finding out the reporting of the situation. The primary
hindrance is that if the command finds out about the problem, it will
dampen the reporting. That is because if there is a crime committed,
under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the command will be the
one prosecuting the crime. If there is a character behavior disorder,
there is a possibility of an administrative discharge.
So knowing this and knowing this is preventing reporting of the
crime or problem, we began working from the area of increased aware-
ness: how do we solve the problem without going to the criminal and
discharge system?
To do this, we got combined support from the State Attorney's Gen-
eral Office Preventive Crime Unit which specializes in areas of child
abuse, spouse abuse currently, and had been putting on conferences
throughout the State, and also the Woman's iResource Center, which is
a local shelter in town, came on board base and helped coordinate this
conference.
The base Human Affairs Office, which has cognizance of the family
situation, went together. So the three agencies together provided a
conference, inviting local support groups from the community and
representatives from the different areas of the command. So that their
awareness of the problem was increased, and the coordination of the
different sources working in the area was increased.
Further, as a followup to the conference that we had, we have
worked out a rough area on how to handle it. This is the order the Navy
is implementing right now. We have been working along the same
constraints that the order will be regulating officially as soon as it is
signed. We continue with our education program. We are trying to get
together some films. WTe are going out to the commands to educate not
only the commanding officers but the persoimel as to the extent of the
problem and what can be clone to assist.
So there is an awareness that the advocates have to be worked on to
solve the problem. It is not necessarily a criminal problem. It is not
necessarily a military problem. It is a social problem.
Assisting the victim in a~ domestic violence situation is not a unique
problem in the military. It is perhaps more complex because she is more
complex because she is a transient person. She has been transplanted
from her home. She may not have any friends or relatives in the area.
Normally, if you are in a situation there may be a friend or relative,
your mother, you can call, some place within a 100-mile. circumference.
Bitt in the military this is often not the case. The family is transplanted.
They may or may not even have enough money to call home to ask
what can I do, I have this kind of a problem.
So this makes helping the victim a much more difficult situation. in
the military. She may be afraid of State laws. A common problem I
have had is California has no laws agains desertion; however, other
States do. A woman will come and say "I can't leave my husband"
because she has implanted in her head that that is desertion. There-
PAGENO="0069"
63
fore, she will lose her children and any blame in the whole situation
will lie on her.
So that is an educational process that has to be brought to the
victims in this situation.
Because of these factors, women in the military, families in the mili-
tary need to be advised of the alternatives as soon as possible to be
assisted in making their decisions of alternatives provided in support.
Currently at Camp Pendleton we have what is called a family ad-
vocacy representative, which is a trained social worker. She gets ap-
proximately 40 cases a month in. She presents to either the victim or
the family as a whole what the alternatives are for them.
If there is counseling desired, they can be referred to a psychiatrist,
a psychologist, or county mental health. If there are fees involved,
the military health plan will pay for those fees. So this is the way
we have been handling it at Camp Pendleton.
I would like to point out that Mrs. Robert Barrows, who is the
wife of the commandant of the Marine Corps, and Mrs. Kenneth
McClennan, who is the wife of the Assistant Commandant of the
Marine Corps, have both been present throughout these entire hear-
ings to show the interest and the concern for the family that the
Marine Corps has. It has been working quite well at Pendleton with the
combined support of the community and the military.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you very much.
Barbara..
Ms. Miicur~sicr. Captain, what happens on the military personnel's
record if this is reported to the commanding officer?
Captain HALSEY. If it is just a spouse abuse case, which has not
risen to crin-iinal charges, as you know, prosecution is discretionary.
And if you haven't got a. viable witness, you don't want to prosecute.
This is traditionally the problem in the civilian sector as well as the
military. If the wife doesn't want to prosecute, it. will not be prose-
cuted. At that point it is up to her as to what she would like to do.
A commander that finds out about. it could prosecute.
Ms. MIKULSKI. The reason behind my question is this: In conferring
with Congresswoman Schroeder, who serves on the Armed Services
Committee, about this particular issue, she brought to our attent.ion
that one of the reasons that domestic violence is not brought forward
in military family situations is that the spouse, the wife, is afraid that,
quite frankly, once it is on the record, he can he thrown out and that
somehow or another the reaction is so-not exaggerated, but it then
dest.roys the source of the income, so von don't want to go that far.
She wants help. She wants to get. it worked out.
Along the lines you indicated, is there a wide discretion? Or if she
turns to help within the military framework, is the record so perma-
nently damaged that there is no hope for a military career?
Captain HALSEY. We found that the wife's concern about the com-
mand's finding out about it has led to the suppression of reporting. As
I said, the way we have found to get around that is to educate those
commar~ders who would have the discretion to t.he fact that it is not
a problem that should be handled legally, necessarily, unless there is
an indication that it needs to be handled. Every case is unique and
needs to be researched.
PAGENO="0070"
64
The family advocacy representative is the one who is involved in
the research in that case. Our committee right now is trying to get a
liaison between each of the commanding officers who have the discre-
tion of what to do to the man into the committee. and hopefully that
will be the chaplain, who will have insights into the situation and re-
late that back t.o the command with a suggestion as to how the corn-
manci can best handle it.
Ms. MIKULSKT. So you are trying to develop some kind of a thres-
hold there. If a wife says, for instance, my husband is abusing me.
they go to counseling or to some of the support programs. She might
even leave him temporarily. But they work it. out and she goes back.
You see, I happen to believe that rehabilitation, counseling, psycho-
therapy, all of that does work. However, if it is then left as a. perma-
nent stigma on your record, there is no hope for family reconciliation..
Captain. HALSEY. Right. The new order that is coming out. I be-
lieve, lends guidance to the commander saying this should not. affect
promotion and retention in the service, but. it should be considered
when making reassignments. So there is written authority for a com-
manding authority not to enter that into the career perspective of a
man's life.
Ms. MIKnLSKT. One other question for you. Captain. If the man is
a severe abuser of both his children and his wife, and she reports that,
what protection does she get other than what might be available in.
the community?
Captain HALSEY. Do you mean protection from her husband?
Ms. MIKULSKI. Yes, for her own safety.
Captain HALSEY. If she desires shelter at Camp Pendleton, we can.
find shelter for her at Camp Pendleton now.
Ms. [IKur~s1u. Lieutenant., one question for you. It seems you have
developed a comprehensive program and you know what to do, but
I gather it is only being partially implemented. How partial is par-
tial? I mean, are you doing it at just one military base?
Lieutenant DOUCETTE. No. What we were referring to in a partial
implementation is that when signed, the family advocacy program is
going to be applicable to all naval medical. centers and hospitals. There
will be coordination worked out with all dispensaries.
In other words, we are. talking about a p1~o~ra1ui that will address
all Navy medical facilities. Partial implementation means that we rec-
ognize that there are no significant or, in some cases, any services avail-
able, in the local community to provide the assistance that we also need.
Quite often the military has to rely on civilian resources, and in some
communities these resources are not. available. That is why we say a
partial implementation.
Additionally, it is partial because there is a recognition that addi-
tional staffing and fiscal support are required which is being investi-
gated now. To be fully implemented in any program would be
addressing all the identified needs audi making some provision for the
future. So that is why it is a partial implementation at this time.
Ms. MIKULsKI. Thank you very much. Mr. Chairman. I have no
further questions.
I would like to just compliment the military witnesses on their thor-
ou~h approach to the program. I am sorry that the doctor from G-\VIJ
didn't run into you.
PAGENO="0071"
65
[General laughter.]
Mr. MILLER. Let me ask you-in terms of Camp Pendleton, do you'
have any idea what number of military wives would seek services off
the base?
Captain HALSEY. In an 8-month period beginning in October, the
IVomen's Resource Center processed 734 cases. That is hotline calls,
shelter, counseling, temporary counseling. One-fifth of those were imi-
itary cases. That statistic is not totally valid, in that answermg a hot-
line call, you don't always ask if the wife is military. So it may be'
higher.
There is a further statistic breaking it down citywide. The city of
Oceanside has the largest Marine Corps population in it, and one-half
of the services extended in the city of Oceanside were to the military..
So it is a large amount of the services they extend.
Mr. MILLER. Why do people use those services as opposed to your
services on the base?
Captain HALSEY. There are people who live out of town and it is
closer for them.
Mr. MILLER. As a matter of convenience?
Captain HALSEY. Yes. Also the concern about the command finding
out about it. It is easier to go to a civilian agency where you know it
will be purely confidential.
Mr. MILLER. Let me ask you this, Lieutenant. In your statement you
say that the family advocacy program is an outgrowth of the Navy
Medical Department's spouse abuse reporting and child advocacy pro-
gram. Is the reporting going to be a component of the family advocacy
program?
Lieutenant DO~UCETTE. The reason it was put in that manner is the
regional spouse abuse program was just. a reporting program. of which,
for statistical reasons, on a fully anonymous form, we received data
from the medical ceiiters.
What we have now in the new instruction is the fact that spouse
abuse will be treated in the same manner child abuse and neglect has
`been, in that when a case becomes identified, from whatever means,.
whether it be the emergency room or the outpatient clinic or a referral,.
the family advocacy representative will be gathering information per-
tinent to that situation, take all of that information `to a committee,
and that committee.~ which meets at a minimum once a month, will
review the facts of the case and insure that an investigation has been
done.
We will then formulate no difference between child or spouse abuse
and neglects meaning there will be either an unfounded diagnosis~
a suspected diagnosis, or an established diagnosis. And to further ad-
dress what you were talking about, the difficulties in reporting, we
have found that as we educate the providers and recipients of the
care, that we are getting increased numbers of reporting. When we
educate people as to the purpose of the central registry for case man-
agement and assistance, then we have been getting much more co-
operation from all levels.
We are getting cooperation from the hospitals, from the base corn-
mands, and we expect that there may be some additional problems
regarding spouse abuse because there is no specific legislation. Bub
PAGENO="0072"
66
currently we are going to treat it just like we have been for child
abuse and neglect.
Mr. SIi~roN. WTould you expect, from your history of watching this
program progress to going into the new family advocacy program,
that you would see your caseload rise?
Lieutenant DOUGETTE. As was brought out, and I don't have the
figures in front of me, I believe 948 was mentioned for last year.
There are some who `believe the reporting will decrease because they
will be identified as cases of established maltreatment.
There are others who say that reporting will probably increase as
long as we stress that prevention and treatment are the primary in-S
terventions of choice and that we have the means to provide them.
As was mentioned in much other testimony, it is one thing to say
come and tell me about it and another thing to have the resources to
start to deal with it. And this is what we need in a combined military-
civilian endeavor.
Mr. MILLER. How soon do you expect this program to be in place?
You mentioned Camp Pendleton in San Diego, North Carolina and
Virginia.
Lieutenant DOUCETTE. Those programs were started over a year ago.
Mr. MILLER. Those are in place, those pilot programs?
Lieutenant DOUCETTE. Yes. they are in place now, and they have
provided the basis, along with our other programs and the informa-
tion from our civilian community, for the present program for which
we are awaiting signature.
Mr. MILLER. Was reporting there done on an anonymous basis in the
pilot program?
Lieutenant DOUCETTE. Yes, it was in the case of spouse abuse. In
reporting child abuse and neglect, it was done in the same manner,
except that in established cases, the abuser was identified, and in
suspected cases the alleged abuser was anonymous.
Mr. MILLER. If the authorities are called on base to a family at
Camp Pendleton because you have a family disturbance. do they have.
the ability to refer the wife and children, or whatever the aggrieved
party is. to immediate. services and/or shelter as is necessary?
Captain HALSEY. When I started working the area approximately
a year ago, we had difficulty finding shelter because of the combined
calls to this women's resource center. Homes in the community were
offered as shelter, and currently the city of Oceanside has given us
$100,000-has given the women's resource center $100,000 to set up a
shelter. So, hopefully, by January there will be a shelter available
to anyone to refer to.
There is no limit on our community resources right now as to
whether you have to be a civilian or military. They are accepting our
military personnel.
Mr. MILLER. All right. Thank you.
Mr. Kramer?
Mr. KRAMER. I have no questions.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you very much for coming and sharing your
testimony with us. I too would like to compliment the service on
this because it appears that you are running a little ahead of the rest
of us. You are to be congratulated for the recognition of the need to
do that.
PAGENO="0073"
Captain HALSEY. Thank you.
Lieutenai~t DOUCETTE. Thank you.
Mr. MILLER. Next, if I might, I would like to reverse the order in
which the next panels would testify because my understanding is
that two witnesses on the last panel, Clara Allen and Ellen Pence,
have some transportation problems. So if it is all right, I would like
to afford them an opportunity to come forward so that they can make
a plane connection.
If you will identify yourself for the reporter, we will hear from
Ms. Allen first.
STATEMENT OP CLARA L. ALLEN, DIRECTOR, NEW FERSEY DIVI-
SION ON WOMEN, DEPARTMENT OP COMMUNITY AFFAIRS,
TRENTON, NJ.
Ms. ALLEN. First I would like to very much thank the committee
for the courtesy in extending cooperation with my travel arrange-
ments. I do appreciate it very much.
I would also like to preface my remarks by saying while sitting
here today I have really scratched out most of my testimony because
it seemed to me in listening both to the conirnittee's questions of the
witnesses, to the witnesses, and so forth, that the subject has been very
well searched.
In addition to that, there is evidence of the committee's real knowl-
edge of the depth of the problem.
Mr. MILLER. If I could interrupt you there, what may be very help-
ful to us, since New Jersey obviously is in the forefront of making an
effort in terms of statutory changes and law, and also in terms of
services, if you could-without directing your testimony-if you
could tell us how you see, whether this legislation would be helpful
or whether it is surplus in light of what the State has done when it
has made a commitment like New Jersey-if you could give us your
reaction to the legislation in light of your State experience, I think
it would be very helpful to all of us.
The definition of the problem is clear. The question is the appro-
priateness of our response. We won't go into dollar amounts, but-
Ms. ALLEN. Thank you. I will attempt to do all of that with the re-
maining portion of the oral testimony I was going to refer to, and
I know you have already received our direct statement.
As you indicated, I am the director of the New Jersey Division on
~Tom~, and I would like to thank the committee for providing me the
opportunity to talk with you, to share our experiences and needs in
shelter pro~ran'is that will serve the needs of the victims of domestic
violence in New Jersey.
I think first you ought to know that the division on women is a per-
manent agency located in the State department of community affairs
and mandated by law to identify the needs of New Jersey women and
to develop and recommend appropriate programs and legislation.
The division serves as the central agency for the coordination of
programs and services for women in the. State and offers technical
assistance to individuals, groups. and organizations in their efforts to
strengthen the role of women in our society.
The division also acts as a clearinghouse, to publish and disseminate
information, and has established a liaison with all other governmental
PAGENO="0074"
68
departments and agencies involved with the programs affecting the
status of women. I believe that the.division is in the unique position to
testify on the problem of domestic violence in New Jersey due to the
fact that it has been collecting information and facilitating and co-
~orchnating an intergovernmental response to this problem for the last
~3 years.
The establishment of shelters and the formalization of service pro-
grams for victims is very, very necessary and very apparent to the
division. However, the lack of sufficient funding is the major obstacle
to the realization of such programing efforts.
The division first became aware of the problem and the need to pro-
vide services when analyzing information collected by our statewide,
toll-free. 24-hour-a-day hotime. In the first month of 1979, the hotline
Ims received approximately L500 calls from victims requesting such
:information.
The magnitude of the problem of domestic violence can be illustrated
by the gTeat demand for information regarding services available to
Tictims. The division has distributed close to 40,000 of its "Battered
T\~\To~uei~~s Guide," which I believe you have now in your possession, in
tthe past 6 months, and distributes to local and county government
ufficials. social service, and law enforcement agencies, a wide range of
organizations and groups.
In February 1978. the first fully funded shelter pro~ram in New
~Jersev opened its doors. and within several days it was filled to capac-
1ty. Today there are 13 shelter programs operating throughout the
~State. all experiencing the same demand for services.
Eight other programs exist in New Jersey which offer emergency
shelter in private homes and counseling services to victims. These pro-
`rams are staffed by volunteers and have very little, if any, funding.
I might note that there were questions raised this morning concern-
ing statistics that would be available from some of the. shelters about
the recovery rates and that kind of thing-by Mr. Kramer. as I recall.
I think that the reason von will find so many people not able. to provide
such statistics is the fact that this was a volunteer effort for a long
Period of time in most. places. These People were not trained in the kind
of statistics that would he necessary to respond.
This is chan ing as the are receiving fimcling'. The overwhelming
demand for shelter and the social services provided by this group of
(commumty-based programs has far outpaced the capacity of these
~existing facilities. For example, 1.708 women were referred to the
:first 5 programs to become fully operational during the period March
:1978 through January 1979; 643 of these were women, along with
1~)71 children.
~Yhen housed at the programs. they received housing and other
~direct services. One thousand sixty-five women were not housed due
to the lack of bed sace or professional staff. That would be the kind
of thine where maybe there were not sufficient volunteers on duty to
be able to respond to a request~ and I think it is unfortunate to say
that we too have experienced deaths as a. result of the fact that people
were not able to be housed.
IDenvinr these women and their children the safe harbor they so
desperately sought has been rather sad. All five shelter programs dis-
~cussed hei~e have been operating at full capacity since shortly after
PAGENO="0075"
69
their doors opened. The search for funding sources has plagued exist-
ing shelter programs and groups working to establish such programs
since the first shelter in North America opened its doors in Hackensack,
N.J., 9 years ago.
That shelter only gained full funding status in the past year. The
division on women, with its small budget, each year allocates certain
amounts of its funds to be of assistance to the shelters that do exist,
for such things as fire escapes, where needed, such things as the fencing
in of areas so children can have free access during the play hours.
The program's desperate search for replacement funds forces them
into constant financial crisis. Too much staff time is devoted to search-
ing for funds rather than concentrating on improving the delivery of
service and assisting victims. The search for replacement funds must
be answered by a cooperative giving on the part of local, State and
Federal governments if the shelter programs are to survive and estab-
lish credibility in their community.
I think it would be a rather harmful thing to establish shelters with
no chance of survival, and that might be a Part of the problem to date.
~ know about H.R 2977. We know that we believe it effectively
addresses the problem and the need for such measures to permit finan-
cial help. WTe know about the victims and we know that the abuser is
just as much a victim sometimes as the abused. We applaud the provi-
sion in H.R. 2977 that primary consideration for funding be given to
grassroots organizations which have been successful in the establish-
ment of community-based shelter programs. They are making signifi-
cant inroads in the areas of criminal justice proceedings. agency pro-
ceedings, and general community understanding of the nature of
domestic violence
While the Division wholeheartedly supports the establishment of
a Federal intra-agency council, we would like to see some changes in
its composition. We have offered you some suggested changes. MTe
believe that section 4 of H.R. 3921~ which is before this committee,
better addresses the need for full intergovernmental and community-
based organization operation.
This section states that the council be composed of not less than
five members of the general public who have been victims of domestic
violence or who are experienced in the operation of community-based
shelters or service pro~ra.ms. but who are not employees of govern-
ment, and representatives, with expertise in the area of prevention
and treatment of domestic violence, from Federal agencies.
In addition, the council should include representatives of State
and local governments who are also recognizing their responsibilities
to the growing problem of domestic violence. All three levels of gov-
ernment need to develop long-term plans and commitments to combat
the problem.
The language should also include the Provision that the non-Federal
members appointed to this council shall at all times constitute a ma-
joritv of the members of the council.
MTe would also like to offer an amendment to section 11 of H.IR.
2977. We feel that the language defining the term "domestic violence"
contained in section 10 of HR. 3921 better describes the victims of
battering, while the definition under section 11 of H.R. 2977 requires
PAGENO="0076"
70
that a victim and the abuser have been, or are, related specifically as
husband and wife.
There is no mention of the fact that victims of domestic abuse are
often not related to the abuser. A. clearer and more precise definition
must take this fact into account.
In line with the Federal legislation, the New Jersey State legislature
has taken action on several pieces of domestic violence legislation this
year. Two of these bills are attached to your material for your infor-
mation. The New Jersey Senate bill 807 was approved by the senate
last month and is awaiting assembly action. This bill authorizes the
State to provide services to those public and private agencies which
meet the standards set forth in the bill to operate the shelters for
victims of domestic violence and their children.
The bill also establishes again an advisory council which will be
TeSponSible for providing technical assistance to help the public and
private agencies to qualify as operators of the shelters and to obtain
State and Fecleral funds for the establishment and maintenance of
the shelters.
New Jersey Senate bill 3244, a companion to 807, is scheduled to
be voted on by the full senate this fall. This bill would amend the
`State's municipal land use law and provide relief to the majority of
shelter programs now operating in New Jersey.
In addition, it would offer groups working to establish programs
more flexibility with regard to choosing the location of a shelter site.
Too often a community's local zoning ordinance has proved to be an
obstacle to the establishment of a. shelter facility in an area conducive
to the healing process~ both physical and psychological, necessary for
victims and their children.
In conclusion, we urge the Congress to adopt this legislation, and
I thank you very, very much for the opportunity to express these
views.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you.
lYe will hear from Ms. Pence, and then we will ask questions of
both of you.
[The prepared statement of Clara L. Allen follows:]
PAGENO="0077"
71
~to:~ of ?~u .i~ro~
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
JOSEPI-i A L6 FANTE 363 WEST STATE STREET
COMMISSIONER POST OFFICE BOX 2768
TRENTON, NJ. 08625
TESTPDNY
BY
CLARA L. ALLEN, DIRECTOR
DIVISION ON WOVEN
BEFORE THE
SUBCOM'IITTEE ON SELECT EDUCATION
COMvEUEE ON EtUCATION AND LABOR
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
TBJNESTIC VIOLENCE LEGISLATION
JULY 10, 1979
WASHINGTON, D.C.
.\eI .Jerset' 1.1' li Equal ()ppor:uiiuv E,np/ut'er
~9-91~ 0. - 79 - 6
PAGENO="0078"
72
I am Clara Allen, Director of the New Jersey State Division on
Women, an agency located in the State Department of Couamuiity Affairs.
The Division is mandated under State law to expand the rights and oppor-
timities of all women in New Jersey, to serve as the central agency for
the coordination of programs and services for women in the State, to
evaluate the effectiveness of such programs and to develop new ones, and
to establish a liaison with all other governmental departments and agencies
involved with programs affecting the status of women.
The Division also offers technical assistance to individuals,
groups and organizations in their efforts to strengthen the role of women
in society, acts as a clearinghouse to publish and disseminate informa-
tion, and serves in an advocacy capacity regarding the development and
recommendation of appropriate pieces of legislation both on the Federal
and State levels.
Meeting the needs of New Jersey women, as well as women throughout
the country, in the 1980's will require real dedication to the special
concerns of women and the cooperation of all levels of government- local,
State and Federal. Shaping policy with regard to the development of the
nation's husan resources will also require flexibility to respond to new
challenges and issues as they arise.
I believe that the Division is in a unique position to testify on
the problem of domestic violence in New Jersey due to the fact that as
a statewide agency, it has been collecting information and facilitating
and coordinating an intergovernmental response to this problem for the
past three years. The Division testified before this Subcommittee in
PAGENO="0079"
73
:~Iarch of 1978, when hearings were held on domestic violence legislation
}-~ 7927 and E~ 8948.
It is apparent to the Division that the widespread and alarming
occurrence of domestic violence on all socioeconomic levels is not
being sufficiently addressed by local, State and Federal government.
As a result, its victims are not receiving the support from social service,
law enforcement and legal agencies which would be given to other victims
of criminal assault. Clearly, the need is for the establishment of
shelters and the formalization of service programs for victims. However,
the lack of sufficient funding is the major obstacle to the realization
of such programming efforts.
The Division first became aware of the problem and the need to
provide relevant services to the victims of domestic violence when analyz-
ing resource information collected by Women's Referral Central, the
Division's statewide, toll-free 24-hour hotline. In addition to identify-
ing existing volunteer programs, it was discovered that many social
service agencies were being called upon to provide assistance to victims
of battering but were having difficulty meeting the need. In the first
six months of 1979, the hotlime has received approximately 1,500 calls
from victims requesting service information.
In early 1977, the Division held a statewide conference desigred to
call attention to the problem and to provide an information exchange
geared to alternative responses to the needs of victims. This conference,
which was planned for 300 people, attracted over 750 participants includ-
ing representatives of the medical, legal, law enforcement, social service
and other professions, as well as women providing volunteer assistance
PAGENO="0080"
74
and interested individuals. The interest in and the reaction to the
conference clearly indicated the need to establish shelters and to
formalize service programs for victims.
)nother more recent illustration of the magnitude of the problem
of domestic violence and the great demand for information regarding
services available to victims is the fact that the Division has distributed
close to 40 thousand copies of its Battered Women's Guide in the past
six months to local and county government officials, social service and
law enforcement agencies and a wide range of organizations, groups and
individuals.
This guide, which is no~ in its fourth printing, lists by coimty all
shelters presently operating in New Jersey and includes a brief narrative
describing the services that are available to victims.
In February of 1978, the first fully-funded shelter program in New
Jersey opened its doors, and within several days was filled to capacity.
Today there are thirteen shelter programs operating throughout the State-
all experiencing the same increasing demand for services. One more
shelter program is scheduled to go into operation in August. In addition,
there are eight other programs existing in New Jersey which offer emergency
shelter in private homes and counseling services to victims. These
programs are staffed by volunteers and have very little, if any, funding.
The overwhelming demand for shelter and the social services provided
by this group of community-based programs has far outpaced the capacity
of these existing facilities. According to data gathered on the first
five programs to become fully operational during the period March 1978
through January 1979, 1,708 women were referred by various sources to
PAGENO="0081"
75
1
the programs. Of these, 643, along with 971 children, were housed at
the program shelters or received other direct services. ~-\n additional
1,065 women who contacted these programs were not housed due to the
lack of bed space and/or professional staff or inappropriate referrals.
Many of these such women often find shelter at the home of a friend or
relative. However, women contacting the shelters are always referred
to other social service agencies which should be able to help them
even if the shelter program cannot.
Shelter staff try hard not to turn away any worrmn requiring emergency
shelter, but admit that over-crowding and the lack of other available
emergency shelter facilities to serve all the women and children who need
them often results in denying women and children the safe harbor they so
desperately seek. All five shelter programs discussed here have been
operating at full capacity since shortly after opening their doors.
To further illustra~te this rapid emergence of domestic violence
victims and their growing demand for services, I refer you to the attached
discussion of the experience of the Atlantic County Abuse Center, an
organization which had been serving victims on a volunteer basis since
its incorporation in October 1974 and which, in February 1978, was the
first shelter in New Jersey to be granted Title XX funding.
1
Of the 1,708 women who were serviced by the five programs during the
report period, 24% were self-referred, 14% were referred by friends and
relatives, 10% were referred by county welfare agencies, 8% were referred
by the Division of Youth % Family Services, NJ Department of Husan Services,
8% were referred by the police, 4% were referred by the court system,
1% were referred by the schools, and the remaining 31% were referred by
sources such as hospitals, other shelters, social service agencies and
newspapers.
PAGENO="0082"
76
The Division is currently working with the New Jersey Department
of Hinoan Services, Division of Youth ~ Family Services, and the New
Jersey Coalition for Battered Women to coordinate all existing programs,
provide technical assistance for the establishment of new programs in
areas of the State where such services are now lacking, and search for
reliable funding sources.
This search for funding sources has plagued existing shelter
programs and groups working to establish such programs since the first
shelter in North Ainerica opened its doors in Hackensack, New Jersey nine
years ago. That shelter- Shelter Our Sisters (SOS)- gained full funding
status only in the past year.
Since 1978, some federal financial assistance has been available
through Title XX Protective Services funds, the Comprehensive Employment
and Training Act (CETA), the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration
(IEAA), the Community Development Block Grant program of HUt), in addition
to assistance from state and county welfare emergency assistance funds,
2
The New Jersey Coalition for Battered Women is composed of 30 shelter
programs and auxiliary services for victims of domestic violence and
their children, as well as 450 concerned individuals, and represents the
estimated 150,000 abused women in New Jersey.
3
Nine shelter programs in New Jersey are presently being funded primarily
under Title XX through contracts with the NJ Department of Hunan Services.
The FY78 Social Services State Plan allocated $300,000 in Title XX protective
services funds for shelters. This amount, matched by $100,000 from public
and private sources within the community, was to have funded 4 regional
programs at a total cost of $400,000. However, by January of 1979, with
added funds, the total value of the contracts reached 5650,000. This was
accomplished by stretching the allocation as far as possible and by the
resourcefulness of the local program sponsors in seeking out additional
public and private funding sources to meet their budgetary requirements,
which are now in excess of 51.1 million for the nine programs. NOTE:
the annual operating budget of an average shelter program is approximately
$ 200,000.
PAGENO="0083"
77
co~mty and local governments, and other public and private sources within
each counriunity. Even the New Jersey Division on Women, with its annual
budget of only $148,000, has granted a total of $14,333 in FY79 monies
to five shelter programs located throughout the State for such funding
4
needs as staff, transportation and building renovation.
While it is agreed that the problems of domestic violence must be
addressed by all levels of government, this present `patchwork" funding
of shelters forces them into constant financial crises. Too much staff
time is devoted to searching for replacement funds rather than concen-
trating on improving the delivery of services to victims. Furthermore,
as discussed previously, when shelters and services are established in
communities, and as victims become aware of them, the demand for services
rises rapidly.
The viability of these existing, successful, grassroots shelter
programs is dependent upon an intergovernmental response to their financial
plight. In order to ensure this viability, the programs' desperate
search for replacement funds must be answered by a cooperative giving
on the part of local, state and federal governments. This cooperation
is absolutely necessary is these successful shelter programs are to survive.
These community-based programs have, in the past several years,
developed successful and innovative service delivery techniques, but they
need financial and technical assistance, especially in the areas of fund
raising and good management. They don't want total federal or state
4
ktlantic County Abuse Center $4,308.00 transportation
Battered Women's Project, Burlington County 3,921.00 bldg. improvement
Jersey Battered Women's Service, Morris County 1,300.00 bldg. improvement
Providence House, Burlington County 2,304.00 transportatiOn
Women Helping Momen, Middlesex County 2,500.00 staff
PAGENO="0084"
78
intervention- what they need is short-term, limited federal funding to
establish their credibility in the colmnunitv and to gain the strength
to solicit and receive greater local and state financial support.
They recognize that the end result is to become economically self-sufficient.
HR 2977, the "Domestic Violence Prevention and Services Act,"
introduced by Congressman Miller and co-sponsored by 58 Representatives
including Congressmen Forsythe, Patten and Thompson of New Jersey,
effectively addresses this problem of funding by providing short-tern
funding over a period of three years. In addition, this legislation focuses
on the need to coordinate existing national, state, county, and local
government and private efforts aimed at long-range solutions as well as
emergency measures.
It's time we recognized that domestic violence is not a narrow
problem in isolation from the rest of society. It is related to a variety
of issues already being addressed by many local, state and federal programs,
including prevention of child abuse, coirununity mental health services, job
counseling, training and placement.
Problems stemming from domestic violence show up in the criminal
justice, juvenile justice, welfare, educational and health care systems.
Clearly, an interdisciplinary, multi-faceted approach is necessary for
the prevention and treatment of domestic abuse.
Without shelter programs and the necessary preventative services
which they provide designed to break the cycle of violence in the home,
the federal government is mow and will continue to pick up the tab for
the increased use of services which aid in picking up the pieces left
by this problem: foster care, hospitalization, institutionalization,
PAGENO="0085"
79
judicial and penal systen, public assistance, among others.
We have the choice of providing some limited funding for preventa-
tive and emergency measures or of expending far greater amounts of money
on mandated social services when those families caught in the web of
domestic violence finally come to a decisive end to this problem, be it
legal action in the form of separation, divorce, or indictment and/or
conviction and incarceration of the abuser on assault and battery
charges or worse, to the grave injury to or death of the abused.
The Division also applauds the provision in HR2977 that primary
consideration for funding be given to grassroots organizations which have
been successful in the establishment of community-based shelter programs.
These organizations have acquired a body of knowledge and expertise which
is often sought out by professionals in social service agencies interested
in helping abused or abusive persons. In addition, they are making sig-
nificant inroads in the area of criminal justice proceedings, agency pro-
cedures and general community understanding of the nature of domestic
violence. Such organizations also provide guidance in the establishment
of new programs, research and data collection and staff training.
In analyzing the provisions of HR 2977, the Division would like to
make two specific recommendations concerning Section 10, Coordination of
Federal Programs, and Section 11, DefinitionS.
hhile the Division wholeheartedly supports the establishment of a
council charged with the coordination of federal level programs for the
prevention of domestic violence and the provision of shelter and other
services to victims and their dependents, we would like to see some
changes in the composition of such a council. Specifically, we feel that
PAGENO="0086"
80
the language regarding the composition of a Federal Council on Domestic
Violence, contained in Section 4 of HR 3921, the "Domestic Violence
Assistance Act of 1978"- which is also before this Subcomaittee- better
addresses the need for full intergovernmental and coarnimity-based organi-
zation cooperation.
The language we would prefer states that the council be coamosed
of not less than five members of the general public who have been victims
of domestic violence or who are experienced in the operation of consimmity-
based shelters or service programs, but who are not employees of government;
and representatives with expertise in the area of the prevention and treatment
of domestic violence from such federal agencies as are listed in Section 10
of HR 2977 and including the Office of Children, Youth ~ Families, Depart-
ment of Health, Education and Welfare.
In addition, the council should include representatives of State or
local governments, for although the Federal government now provides the
primary financial assistance for many shelter programs, the State and local
governments are recognizing their responsibilities to the growing problem
of domestic violence. All three levels of government need to develop
long-term plans to combat the problem, including changes in the criminal
justice system, social service delivery and public education.
And finally, the language should include the provision that the non-
Federal members appointed to this council shall at all times constitute
a majority of the members of the council.
This amended version of Section 10, HR 2977 is attached for your
information.
PAGENO="0087"
82
the establishment and maintenance of shelters, recommend innovative
strategies regarding the prevention of domestic violence, foster coopera-
tion and communication among the providers of services to victims, arid
provide guidelines for the training and use of volunteers in the delivery
of services. This council will be composed of ten members, including
the Director of the Division on Women, representatives from state depart-
ments and agencies which offer or should offer programs or services for
victims, and representatives from viable, successful grassroots shelter
programs.
The bill emphasizes the need for cooperation ameng existing service
delivery agencies and recognizes the need for bilingual assistance. A
copy of this legislation is attached for your information.
New Jersey Senate Bill 3244, amending the State's Municipal Land
Use Law, was reported favorably from Senate Comnittee in June of 1979 and
is scheduled to be voted on by the full Senate in the fall.
This bill, which is intended as a companion measure to 5. 807, would
permit the location of shelters for victims of domestic violence and
their children within the provisions of the law. S. 3244 would require
that any such shelter be approved and certified by the Department of Human
Services pursuant to the provisions of 5. 807, which provides standards
for the establishment and operation of shelters.
The passage of 5. 3244 will provide relief to the majority of shelter
programs now operating in New Jersey, in addition to offering groups work-
ing to establish programs more flexibility with regard to choosing the
location of the site. Too often a community's local zoning ordinance
has proved to be an obstacle to the establishment of a shelter facility
PAGENO="0088"
81
The Division would also like to offer an amendment to Section 11 of
HR 2977, regarding the definitions of cei~tain terms as used in the legi-
slation.
Again, we feel that the language defining the term "domestic
violence" as contained in Section 10 of HR 3921 better describes the
victims of battering. While the definition under Section 11 of HR 2977
requires that a victim and the abuser have been or are related, specifically
as husband and wife, thei~e is no mention of the fact that victims of
domestic abuse are often not related to the abuser. A clearer and more
precise definition must take into account this fact.
The amended version of Section 11 is also attached for your informa-
tion.
In line with proposed Federal legislation on domestic violence,
the New Jersey State Legislature has taken preliminary action on several
pieces of domestic violence legislation this year. The Division has been
instrumental in the drafting of these bills and has worked for nearly
two years on a lobbying effort to promote their passage.
New Jersey Senate Bill 807, the "Shelters for Victims of Domestic
Violence Act," was approved by the Senate on June 21, 1979 and is presently
awaiting Assembly action scheduled for the fall. This legislation
authorizes the Department of Human Services to provide services to those
public and private agencies, which meet the standards set forth in the bill,
to operate shelters for victims of domestic violence and their children.
The legislation also establishes an klvisory Council which will be responsible
for providing technical assistance to help public and private agencies to
qualify as operators of shelters and to obtain State and Federal funds for
PAGENO="0089"
83
in an area conducive to the healing process, both physical and psycho-
logical, necessary for victins and often their children.
In conclusion, the Division hopes that domestic violence legislation
is approved by the 96th Congress and that such legislation adequately
adrresses the needs of victims and the especially acute financial assistance
needs of the community-based shelter programs. The problem of domestic
viclence is probably one of the most compelling social issues at this
time, and a coordinated government response is critical.
PAGENO="0090"
84
WOMEN~S
State of New Jersey
Brendan Byrne, Governor
New Jersey Department of Community Affairs (
Joseph A. LeFante, Commissioner
Division on Women
Clara Allen, Director
V
Division on Women
363 West State Street
Trenton, New Jersey 08625
Telephone: (609) 292-8840
PAGENO="0091"
INTRODUCTION
If you are beaten or threatened by your husband or
boyfriend there is help available. Although a battering
problem is complex and every abused woman's situa-
tion is unique, there are many common problems: most
momen who are battered need physical safety, financial
and legal help, and emotional security for themselves
and often their children. This leaflet explains the type
of help available and where to get it.
IF YOU HAVE AN EMERGENCY.
You may need to leave your home in a hurry. If you
have no place to go, there are shelters and other facili-
ties available for you and your children. Your local
battered women's group can help you locate them. Le-
gally, it is not considered desertion to leave your home
under extreme circumstances. Another option is to have
the court order your husband to leave the home. You
need a lawyer's assistance for this, because it is diffi-
cult to obtain. Welfare may be able to provide you
with "emergency funding" and other forms of immedi-
ate financial assistance. In addition to helping you with
the above, your local battered women's group can help
you obtain vmergevcy medical care and provide trans-
portation.
If you have been beaten, and if for some reason you
aren't willing or able to contact one of the battered
women's organizations, we strongly urge you to immedi-
ate/V contact (preferably in person( a family member
or friend and describe to him or her what has happen-
ed. If you wait tee long after a battering incident to
contact someone, yea may lose this person as a witness.
HELP IS ALSO AVAILABLE FOR LONG-RANGE
PLANNING
Whether you want to leave your home or not, you
can prepare for the future. Counseling and/or discus-
sion groups with women in similar situations are use-
ful for understanding your options. Many of the local
battered women's groups offer these services and can
also answer many questions you may have about your
alternatives. You can receive help with:
* divorce, support and child custody problems
O welfare, food stamps and other forms of
public assistance
* job hunting
* financial planning
* housing
* pressing criminal charges against your husband
or boyfriend
* obtaining a lawyer
PLAN AHEAD. . . HOW YOU CAN PREPARE FOR
AN EMERGENCY
- Financial and Legal Documents - Gather and Keep
These in One Safe Place (Preferably At A Neighbor's
If Possible):
° important papers such as marriage certificate,
birth certificates, credit cards, bank books,
insurance policies, etc.
* records of your husband's income (copy of his
paycheck, W2 form, tax statement, etc.)
* records of household bills (mortgages, utilities,
medical bills, insurance, food receipts, etc.)
* have bank accounts, stocks, bonds, etc. put in
your name only, if possible
* save as much money as you can
- In Case of a Battering Incident - Save Evidence:
o take pictures of injuries (Polaroid photos are
best)
* get the names of nurses and doctors who admin-
istered medical care )nurses are preferable since
doctors are often excused from court)
* get the names of police officers with whom you
have had contact
* get names and addresses of any witnesses
* get copies of medical reports
Also, try to set aside clothing for yourself and your
children that can be picked up in an emergency. Most
importantly, keep the phone number of a shelter or
local battered women's group in a handy but secret
place.
THIS LEAFLET IS ONLY A GUIDE. IT IS BEST TO SEEK ASSISTANCE FROM
ONE OF THE CENTERS NEAR YOUR HOME.
TOLL FREE HOT LINE - 800.322-8092
WOMEN'S REFERRAL CENTRAL, Information and Referral Service serving New Jersey
women 24 hours a day, Division on Women/Together, Inc.
PAGENO="0092"
86
--
/-~(~:~ ~ ~
~ Z-~,1/ ~
BATTERED WOMEN CENTERS
ATLANTIC ACwC Abuse Center
(609) 645-6767
Emergency shelter available
BERGEN Community Action Program
(2011 487-8gt4
Emergency shelter available
Shelter Our Sisters
(201) 944-9600
Emergency shelter available
BURLINGTON Providence House/Williegbero Shelter
1609) 387-3151
Emergency shelter available
CAMDEN Alternatives eor Women Nom
(609) 964-8034
Camden County Crisis Center
(609) 428-0505
Volunteers oC America
(609) 964-0100, ext. 39
Shelter available
CUMBERLAND Cumbertand Co. Guidance Center
(609) 327-2222
ESSEX Essex County Family Violence Project
(201) 484-4446
Emergency s helter available
Essex Legal Psychological Shelter
(208) 762-520)
Em ergency s helter available
HUNTERDON Women's Crisis Service
(201) 782-HELP
Emergency shelter available
HUDSON Hudson County Battered
Women's Project
(201) 333-5700
Emergency shelter available
BATTERED WOMEN CENTERS
MERCER Womanspace, Inc.
(609) 394-9000
Shelter available
MIDDLESEX Women's Crisis Center
(201) 828-7273
Em ergency s helter available
Women Helping Women
1201) 960-0905
Emeroencysbelterava liable
MONMOUTH Women's Resource and Suruivial
Center
(201) 264-4111
Emergnecysbelt cc aca liable
MORRIS Jersey Battered Women Service
1201) 267-4763
Em ergency s belt er ava liable
OCEAN Western Center
(2811 928-0014
Emergency sbelter ava liable
PASSAIC Women's Haven
(201) 881-1450
SOMERSET Women's Resouece Center
(201) 685-1122
Shelter auailable
SUSSEX Battered Person's Resource Center
1201) 875-7561 ater 3 p.m.
Emergency shelter auailable
UNION Battered Women Project
(201) 355.HELP
Emergency shelter axailable
FIRST PRINTING - OCTOBER, 1978
SECOND PRINTING - FEBRUARY, 1979
THIRD PRINTING - MARCH, 1979
FOURTH PRINTING - MAY, 1979
PAGENO="0093"
87
ATLXNTIC COUNTY ABUSE CENTER
COUNSELING, REFEPJ?AL, AND SI-~LTER PROGRV1 FOR VICTIMS OF DONESTIC VIOLENCE
The Atlantic County Abuse Center serves a 7-county region in
New Jersey ~mown as the Southern Region and receives referrals not only
from the other three regions in the State, but from Pennsylvania and
Delaware as well. This organization has been serving victims of rape
and domestic violence on a volunteer basis since its incorporation in
October of 1974, and it was the first shelter in New Jersey to open under
Title EN funding- receiving its grant in February of 1978.
With this organization's on-going collection of data, the following
experiences can be reported:
1. the victims of domestic violence are the helpless, most often
women and children;
2. the perpetrators of abuse are themselves victims, for having
been abused themselves as children, or witness to abuse between their own
parents, they in turn perpetuate this same learned behavior on their own
children, thus continuing the cycle of violence;
3. over 85% of the center's clients report that they as well as
their abusers were abused as children;
4. although women trapped in an abusive situation live in constant
fear, they do not do so by choice for as shelters open they are immediately
filled to capacity;
5. the center has operated at capacity (20 beds) 95% of the time
during its first year; it turns away 35% to 50% of its capacity number
monthly, and women who cannot accept outpatient services due to fear that
~9-91L~ 0 - 79 - 7
PAGENO="0094"
88
their husbands or lovers will find out go uncounted;
6. in the center's first year of operation, it rrovided shelter
to 112 clients and more than 200 children, in addition to the provision
of counseling and referral services to 113 other clients on an out-
patient basis (2 of these clients were men);
7. as the center enters its second year of fully-funded operation,
it sees the following needs as crucial to the continued success of the
program and other similar programs:
a) funding must be provided to establish additional shelter
programs. No client who has brought herself to the point where she finally
asks for help should be turned away due to lack of space. The Federal
government must take the lead in allocating funds for the establishment
of an adequate number of shelters to meet the needs of these victims.
The shelters now in existence have more than proved the need of such
programs;
b) referral and on-going counseling for abusers must be part
of the total shelter program service delivery plan. No program dealing
with domestic violence is addressing the entire problem unless some pro-
vision is made for the abuser; and
c) any program dealing with domestic violence must have the
means of providing services to the children involved. At present, the
center provides day care, sporatic interim schooling, and security. The
center has not, however, begun to address the specific problems of these
children which require counseling, referral, and coordination of services
with those agencies dealing in child abuse.
PAGENO="0095"
89
None of the needs and concerns discussed here can be adequately
addressed, however, without the backing of enabling legislation. The
Federal government must take an active role in establishing a legislative
responsibility to prevent and treat the problem of domestic violence in
this country. Legislation must be enacted to provide secure funding for
programs to enable them to deal with domestic abuse on a scale that pro-
vides services not only to all victims who request them, but to the
equally victimized perpetrators of the abuse.
Laws must also be enacted and enforced that reverse the accepted
view of women as property. Until society and the law begin to trnly
grant women equal educational opportunity, equal job opportunities, and
equal economic opportunities through the use of credit and access to
housing, shelters will remain crisis intervention centers, unable to
adequately provide long-range sàlutions to the problem. Until society
and the law begin to view domestic violence as a crime, women and children
will have no choice but to accept the fear with which they live.
PAGENO="0096"
90
July 10, 1979
NE~ JERSEY DIVISION ON NO~EN
SUGGESTED NDMENTS TO F-~ 297
SECTION 10 - COORDINATION OF FEDEFAL PROGR-\MS
(a) (1) In order to assist the Director in coordinating at the
Federal level programs for the prevention of domestic violence and the
provision of iuunediate shelter and other assistance to victims and the
dependents of victims of domestic violence, a Federal Domestic Violence
Council is established. Such council shall be chaired by the Director
and shall be composed of-
(A) not less than five members of the general public to be appointed
by the Secretary who are individuals who have been victims of domestic
violence or who are experienced in the operation of conuiiunity-based
shelters or service programs for victims of domestic violence and their
children and in the delivery of services to such victims, but who are not
employees of government; and
(B) representatives with expertise in the area of the prevention
and treatment of domestic violence, from such agencies as-
(i) the Action Agency;
(ii) the Department of Agriculture (with respect to the food
stamp program);
(iii) the Office of Children, Youth I, Families, HEW;
(iv) the Conununity Services Administration;
(v) the Department of Defense;
(vi) the Deparriunent of Housing and Urban Renewal;
PAGENO="0097"
91
SUG~STED ~ND~EXTS TO HR 20T~
SECTION 10
(vii) the Department of Justice (including the Law Enforcement
Assistance Administration);
(viii) the Legal Services Corporation;
(ix) the appropriate Institutes within the Alcohol, Drug Abuse,
and Mental Health Administration; and
(x) representatives of State and local governments: Provided
however, That the non-Federal members appointed pursuant to subparagraph(A)
of this section shall at all tines constitute a majoritY of the members of
the Council.
The remaining paragraphs of Section 10 remain as they are written
in HR 2977
PAGENO="0098"
92
July 10, 1979
NEW JERSEY DIVISION ON ~:cMEN
SUGGESTED XOENDMENTS -Gt 2DT
SECTION 11 - DEFINITIONS
(1) "domestic violence" means any act or threatened act of violence,
including any forceful detention of an individual, which results or
threatens to result in physical injury; and is corrniiitted by a person
against another person to whom such person is married or has been married
or with whom such person is residing or has resided;
(2) "victim" means any individual threatened with or suffering
injury or duress as a result of domestic violence, or the child Tmder
the age of eighteen of such individual.
The remaining definitions imder Section 11 remain as they are
written in HR 2977.
PAGENO="0099"
93
r~i~D ~CM I~0F~US FA~LY'S HCM~
* !t `~
/1~\ c%~ ~ ~ ~ 1~"~~i°~'1 ~O~°~'~! ~
~ *~\_~ ~e~~wj~i
Li
By NANCY JAFFER
A Morris County judge had ordered
a factory worker to stay away from his
family'a Butler home less than week
before the man was accused of murder-
ing his estranged wtfe and her mother.
Rita Asencis. 3t. and her mother.
Ruth LaMoni, 61. were found dead in
their Iwo-story house by police about
1:10 am. Sunday. The authsrities also
discovered Mrs. Asencio's husband,
Wilfredo. 32. unconscious near his wife's
body with a self-inflicted wound in hia
left shoulder from a 12-gauge shotgun.
Asenclo, who was charged with two
counts of murder by Morris County au-
thorities, is being guarded by sheriff's
deputies in Chilton Memorial Hospital.
Pompton Plains, where he is in the
intensive care unit.
Court papers filed by Mrs. Asenclo
last week indicated a history of violent
encounters with her husband, whom she
accused of beating her, kicking her in
the head. throwing a knife in a bathroom
door and forcing her Is submit to his
sexual atlentiom.
Last Monday, she sought and re-
ceived a temporary restraining order
from Morris Counts' Juvenile and
Domestic Relations Court Judge Donald
Coilester barring Asencie from coming
to her parents' Butler home, where the
couple lived with their two chiidren.
They `were married 11 years.
A final hearing on a permanent
order had been set for Friday. Assorts
also was scheduled to appear in Butler
Municipal Court later this month on an
assault charge Mrs. Asencis filed after
she said he bit her upper lip and punched
her in the upper cheek and nose.
The county court complaint noted
Asencio "has several guns and has on
numerous occasions threatened to use
them." It added he made her "subservi-
est and akin to being a slave," and that
his actions had put the entire family
"into a slate of deFismamzatisn."
Morris County prosecutor Peter
Manahan said Asencio. who worked in
the finishing department at toe Boontoit
Molding Co.. was living in Btcomingdaie
after separating from Ots wife.
He said Aoencio apparently entered
the house through a window. The victims
svere in their nightclothes. Manahan
added.
Also in the house at the time were
the Asencios' two children, Wilireso Jr.,
tO. and Maria, 9; Mrs. Aaencto'o grand-
mother. Mrs. Lucy LaMort and Mrs.
LaMont'o husband Frank. They were not
harmed, Manahan said.
He added Mrs. LaMont called the
Butter police indicating Asencto was
"breaking up the house." Authorities re-
sponded within minutes, according to
Please turn to Page 1Z)
g oq'
- Mccusec~ w~e murc3erer
* defied restrcthi~ng order
(Continued from Page One)
Butler Police Chief Earl Dean, only to
discover the bodies.
Saturday night. hours before she
died, Mrs. Asencio called Fran Potts,
director of the New Jersey Battered
Women's Service, pleading for a place to
stay.
A shelter planned for Greyslone
Park State Hospital has not opened be-
cause of funding complications and
Potts was unable to offer her refure.
"We're really feeling just horrtble,"
Potts said yesterday. "I can't help but
think Rita might have been alive today if
I had to been able to shelter her Satur-
day night."
She said Mrs. Asencio, who worked
in a bank, had been seeking help from
the organization stnce last spring.
"She was somebody you'd like to be
friends with. She was a wonderful
human being and she did try to do a lot
for herself," Pstts recalled.
Manahan said Asencis will be taken
Is the Msrr~o County Jail in Ntorristown
as sees as doctors sac he can leave the
hospital. Bail has been oct at $`,3O,000.
A Mass wtll be offered for Mrs.
Aoencio and Mrs. LaMont lomorrsw at
10 am. in St. Anthony's Church, Butler,
with burial to follose in Mt. Calvary
Cemetery
PAGENO="0100"
94
Section One: Page 60
The Star-Ledger HE
us," said Merc,urio-l-'otts.
She said two Butler police officers. Dennis Passenti
and Jerry Napoleone, who responded to the distress call
made by Mrs. LaMont have personally raised 03.000 to
assist the shelter.
By JOAN BABBAGE
The Jersey Battered Women's Service (JBWS) shel-
ter on the grounds of Greystone Park State Psychiatric
Hospital in Parsippany-Troy Hills has been filled to ca-
pacity since it opened last December, according to its
*.directorof women'sservices.
"The need is so great that we often have a waiting
list. and we have had to turn women away, which we hate
to do." said Frances Mercurio-Potts.
Mercurio-Potts notedthe 13-room house, formerly
utilized by the state hospital, can accommodate 20 adults
and has cribs for three infants.
Administrator-director Jean Mártorana, a former
probation officer, said the shelter had served as a refuge
for 30 women during its three-month existence.
"The oldest was 46 and the youngest was 19. Most of
the women who come to us are in their late 20s or early
30s. We believe many older women need our services,
but they may not be asmobile as the younger ones or
have come to accept their plight as being hopeless," she
said. -
Mercurio-Potts said although the shelter provides
communal living, which is difficult at best, there haveS
-been no serious problems or conflicts. She noted thatthe
JBWS has guidelines for operation, including a three-day -
evaluation period andasharing of household chores.
She said among, the positive results is the fact a
number of the women who met at the shelter have de-
cided to share their homes and expenses and be mutually
~upportiveafter their departure. -
Martorana said the JBWS does a followup on every
woman who has been sheltered7 and has found that they~
haveprovento be veryself-sufficient on their own.
`However, the ones who have returned to theirhus-
bands unfortunately have notfared as well," sheadded-
Mercurio-Potts said the JBWS has a speakers bu-
reau to educate the public about their services. Members -
alsodotelephone counsellingon aspecial hot line.
"Many men have told us that they are glad we are
here, and just the other day' we received a call from a
man who asked if we could advise him how to stop abus-
ing his wife," she said. "His spouse was not at the shelter,
so that wasn't the reason for the call. We directed him to
the Violence Clinic at the Vetera.nsHospital in East
Orange
Mercurio-Potts said another positive resuli was that
local police departments have become more understand-
ing of the problem of battered wives.
She said a tragedy which helped launch the shelter
was the murder las~-.DctQkf~ of Butler residents Rita
Asencio and her mother, Mrs. Ruth LaMont Mrs. Asen-
cio's husband, Wilfredo, wascharged with the crimes.
"Many of us who are now working at the shelter
mew Rita very well, and her death has deeply affected
The facility, ~hich almost didn't open-because of
financial problems, is being funded by the Junior League
of Morristown. the State Division of Youth and Family
Services, the ~vIorris County Board of Freeholders and
private donations.
Among the director's future dreams is to be able to
increase the staff of four and to offer more services. She
said there is a need for both men and women to serve
volunteers.
"We need people to provide transportation and to
man our hotline. We also could use donations of food,
clothing, furniture, housewares and a set of encyclope-
dias," shesaid. ,` , . . -
Mci-curio-Potts, believes the JBWS had been able to
build up women's self-confidence and to bring ~.ut their
potential- . - -I'
"it is easy to get out of a marriage todayj So why
endure physical abuse? NQone deserves to be beaten and
no one likes it."
Shelter for battered filled to capacity
PAGENO="0101"
95
SENATE CO)JMITTEE SL~BSTIT1TE FOR
SENATE, No. 807
STATE OF NEW JERSEY
ADOPTED JFNE 14, 1979
Ax ACT concerning shelters for victims of domestic violence.
1 BE IT ENACTED by the Senate and General Jssenibly of the State
2 of Yew Jersey:
1 1. The Legislature finds and declares that there is a present and
2 growing need to develop services to protect victims of domestic
3 violence. It is the purpose of this act to encourage the development
4 of shelters for these victims and their children where they may
5 obtain necessary services, including shelter, counseling and other
6 social services.
1 2. This act shall be known and may be cited as the "Shelters for
2 Victims of Domestic Violence Act.''
1 3. The Department of Human Services shall provide services
2 to those public or private agencies, which meet the standards set
3 forth in this act, to operate shelters for victims of domestic vio-
4 lenee. Priority for the allocation of services shall be to viable.
5 existing programs which have successfully performed the delivery
6 of shelter and other services to victims of domestic violence prior
7 to the effective date of this act.
1 4. There is created an Advisory Council on Shelters for Victims
2 of Domestic Violence which shall consist of 10 members: the Di-
3 rector of the Division on Women, the Director of the Division of
4 Youth and Family Services, the Director of the Division of Public
5 Welfare, the Commissioner of the Department of Education, the
6 Executive Director of the State Law Enforcement Planning
7 Agency, or their designees, and one representative of Legal Ser-
8 vices of New Jersey, one former domestic violence shelter resident,
9 and three representatives of shelters for domestic violence pro-
10 grams to be appointed by the Governor, without regard to political
11 affiliation.
1 5. The Commissioner of Human Services, in consultation with
* 2 the advisory council, shall establish standards to be met by those
3 shelters applying for services to assure the availability of special-
4 ized personnel, resources and equipment necessary to enable such
PAGENO="0102"
96
5 shelters to carry out the purposes of this act. `[pon establishment
6 of a program of services, the commissioner in consultation with the
7 advisory council shall periodically appraise its performance to
S determine whether the purposes of this act are being nier.
1 6. The Commissioner of Human Services, in consultation with
2 the advisory council. shall:
3 a. Provide technical assistance to help public and private agell-
4 cies to qualify as operators of shelters and to obtain State and
5 Federal funds for the establishment and maintenance of shelters.
6 b. Suggest the types of innovative strategies in services which
7 will ameliorate and reduce the problems of domestic violence.
8 c. Foster cooperation and communication among the providers
9 of services to victims of domestic violence to promote agreement
10 among providers concerning the treatment needs of those victims.
11 d. Provide guidelines for the training and use of volunteers in
12 the delivery of services.
1 7. A. shelter shall provide a residential area which provides safe
2 refuge for victims of domestic violence. A. shelter shall also pro-
3 vide a day program or drop-in center, located at the shelter site
4 or in a separate facility, which can assist victims of domestic vio-
5 lence who have not yet made the decision to leave their homes, or
6 who have found other shelter but who nevertheless have a need
7 for the services provided at the shelter.
1 8. A. shelter shall arrange for the provision of the following
2 services to victims of domestic violence:
3 a. Emergency niedical care.
4 b. Emergency legal assistance.
5 c. Marriage and family counseling and emergency psychological
6 support and counseling, as requested.
7 d. Information regarding education, job counseling and training
8 programs, housing, welfare and other available social services
9 accomplished, wherever possible, by referrals to appropriate an-
10 thorities or agencies.
1 9. The shelter staff shall advocate the delivery of services from
2 such agencies as county welfare departments and law enforcement
3 and legal service3 agencies to those served, by the shelters.
1 10. To the extent feasible, one or more of the shelter personnel
2 shall be bilingual. An effort shall he made to recruit former vie-
3 tims of domestic assault as staff members.
1 11. The commissioner shall seek and make use of any funds which
2 are available from Federal or oLher sources in order to augment
3 any State funds appropriated for the purposes of this program.
1 12. Information which may reveal the identity or location of a
PAGENO="0103"
97
S
2 person seeking shelter services shall not be disclosed, except as
3 otherwise specifically required by law or with the consent of the
4 person seeking shelter services.
1 13. No shelter providing care for a minor who was in the actual
2 custody of a parent at the time the parent applied for shelter ser-
3 vices shall release the minor to any person. including the child's
4 other parent, without the consent of the parent who sought. shelter,
5 except as may be otherwise required by court order.
1 14. This act shall take effect immediately.
STATEMENT
This bill, to be knowii as the `Shelters for Victims of Domestic
Violence Act," authorizes the Department of Human Services to
provide services to those public or private agencies, which meet
the standards set forth in the act to operate shelters for victims
of domestic violence.
The bill establishes an Advisory Council on Shelters for Victims
of Domestic Violence. The Commissioner of Human Services, in
consultation with the Advisory Council, shall establish standards
for the operation of shelters.
This bill emphasizes the need for cooperation among the existing
service delivery agencies and recognizes the need for bilingual
assistance.
The Commissioner of Human Services is directed to seek and
make use of any funds which are available from Federal and other
sources in order to augment State funds available for the purposes
of this program.
PAGENO="0104"
98
SENATE, No. 3244
STATE OF NEW JERSEY
INTRODUCED MAY 10, 1979
By Senators LIPMAN, YATES, PERSKIE, A. RUSSO, HERBERT
and ORECHIO
Referred to Committee on County and Municipal Government
Ax ACT to amend the title of "An act concerning community resi-
dences for the developmentally disabled, and supplementing the
`Municipal Land Use Law,' approved January 12, 1976 (P. L.
1975, c. 291)," approved December 7, 1978 (P. L. 1978, c. 159,
C. 40:55D-66.1 et seq.), so that the same shall read "An act
concerning community residences for the developmentally dis-
abled and community spousal assault shelters, and supplementing
the `Municipal Land Use Law,' approved January 14, 1976
(P. L. 1975, c. 291)," and to amend the body of said act.
1 BE IT ENACTED by the Senate and General Assembly of the State
2 of New Jersey:
1 1. The title of P. L. 1978, c. 159 (C. 40:55D-66.1 et seq.) is
2 amended to read as follows: An act concerning community resi-
3 deuces for the developmentally disabled and community spousai
4 assault shelters, and supplementing the "Municipal Land Use
5 Law," approved January 14, 1976 (P. L. 1975, c. 291).
1 2. Section 1 of P. L. 1978, c. 159 (C. 40 :55D-66.1) is amended
2 to read as follows:
3 1. Community residences for the developmentally disabled and
4 community spousal assault shelters shall be a permitted use in
5 all residential districts of a municipality, and the requirements
6 therefor shall be the same as for single family dwelling units
7 located within such districts; provided, however, that, in the case
S of a community residence for the developmentally disabled or
9 community spousal assault shelter housing more than six persons,
10 excluding resident staff. a Zoning ordinace may require for the
11 use or conversion to use of a dwelling unit to such a community
12 residence or shelter, a conditional use permit in accordance with
13 section 54 of the act to which this act is a supplement
EXPLANATION-Matter enclosed in bold.faced brackets (thus] in the above bill
it not enacted a~d is intended tu beomitted in the law.
PAGENO="0105"
99
2
14 (C. 40 :55D-67). Any requirements imposed for the issuance of a
15 conditional use permit shall be reasonably related to the health,
16 safety and welfare of the residents of the district: provided, how-
17 ever, that a municipality may deny such a nermit to any proposed
is community residence for the de'elonmentally di~ahled or corn-
19 munity spousal assault shelter which would be located within 1500
20 feet of an existing such residence or shelter; provided further,
21 however, that a municipality may deny the issuance of any addi-
22 tional such permits if the number of (developmentally disabled
23 and mentally ill] persons, other than resident staff, resident at
24 existing such community residences or community shelters within
25 the municipality exceeds 50 persons, or 0.5% of the population of
26 the municipality, whichever is greater.
1 3. Section 2 of P. L. 1978, c. 159 (C. 40 :55D-66.2) is amended
2 to read as follows:
3 2. As used in this act(,]: a. "community residence for the de-
4 velopmentally disabled" means any community residential facility
5 licensed pursuant to P. L. 1977, c. 448 (C. 30:11B-1 et seq.) pro-
6 viding food, shelter and personal guidance, under such supervision
7 as required, to not more than 15 developmentally disabled or
8 mentally ill persons, who require assistance, temporarily or perma-
9 nently, in order to live in the community, and shall include, but not
10 be limited to: group homes, half-way houses, intermediate care
11 facilities, supervised apartment living arrangements, and hostels.
12 Such a residence shall not be considered a health care facility within
13 the mea.ning of the "Health Care Facilities Pla.uning Act" (P. L.
14 1971, c. 136; C. 26:2H-1 et seq.). In the case of such a community
15 residence housing mentally ill persons, such residence shall have
16 been approved for a purchase of service contract or an affiliation
17 agreement pursuant to such procedures as shall be established by
18 regulation of the Division of Mental Health and Hospitals of the
19 Department of Human Services. As used in this act, "develop-
20 mentally disabled person" means a person who is developmentally
21 disabled as defined in section 2 of P. L. 1977, c. 448 (C. 30 :11B-2),
22 and "mentally ill person" means a person who is afflicted with a
23 mental illness as defined in R. S. 30:4-23. but shall not include a
24 person who has been committed after having been found not guilty
25 of a criminal offense by reason of insanity or having been found
26 unfit to be tried on a criminal charge.
27 b. "Community spousal assault shelter" means any shelter ap-
28 proved for a purchase of service contract and certified pursuant to
29 standards and procedures established by regulation of the Depart-
30 ment of Human Bervices pursuant to P. L. ., a.
PAGENO="0106"
100
3
31 (C. .) (now pending before the Legislature as Senate
32 No. 807), providing food, shelter, medical care, legal assistance,
33 personal guidance. and other services to not more than 15 persons
34 who have been victims of spousal assault, including any children
35 of such victinis, who temporarily require shelter and assistance in
36 order to protect their physical or psychological welfare.
1 4. This act shall take effect immediately, but shall remain in-
2 operative until the enactment of Senate No. 807 (now pending
3 before the Legislature).
STATEMENT
This bill is intended as a companion measure to Senate Bill
No. 807, the "Spousal Assault Shelter Act." The bill would amend
the recently enacted legislation permitting the location of com-
munity residences for the developmentally disabled in residentäl
districts of municipalities (P. L. 1978, c. 159; 0. 40 :55D-66.1 et
seq.), to include community spousal assault shelters within the
provisions of the law.
The bill would require that any such shelter be approved and
certified by the Department of Human Services pursuant to the
provisions of Senate Bifi No. 807. The bill would take effect only
upon enactment of Senate Bill No. 807, which provides standards
for the establishment and operation of such shelters.
PAGENO="0107"
101
{Pre~ared statement of Ellen Pence follows:]
ME. CHAippwl AND MEMBERS OF THE SUBCCEMITTEE:
I AM ELLEN PENCE, THE STATE DIRECTOR OF MINNESOTA PROGRAMS FOR BATTERED WOMEN.
NI HERE TODAY TO TESTIFY ON H. R. 2977 RELATIVE TO THE ALLOCATION OF FEDERAL FUNDS FOR
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROGRAMS, IN 1977 - 78 THE MINNESOTA STATE LEGISLATURE PASSED
LEGISLATION VERY SIMILAR TO THIS BILL IN PURPOSE. THE MINNESOTA LEGISLATION, ALLOCATING
$625,000, HAD FOUR MAJOR PROVISIONS:
1. THE LEGISLATION ALLOCATED MONIES TO FUND FOUR OR MORE SHELTERS IN BOTH URBAN
AND RURAL AREAS IN THE STATE.
2. IT PROVIDED FOR THE ESTABLISF-I1ENT OF AN 18-MEMBER ADVISORY TASK FORCE OF
PROFESSIONALS AND GRASSROOTS PEOPLE WITH EXPERIENCE IN WORKING WITH BATTERED
WEWEN.
3. IT REQUIRED ALL SOCIAL SERVICE, LAW ENFORCEMENT, AND MEDICAL PERSONNEL TO
REPORT INCIDENCES OF BATTERING TO THE ADMINSTRATING STATE AGENCY FOR THE
PURPOSE OF DETERMINING THE NEED FOR CONTINUED AND/OR EXPANDED STATE FUNDING.
14, AND FINALLY, IT PROVIDED FUNDS TO CONDUCT A STATEWIDE EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM
FOR BOTH PROFESSIONALS AND THE PUBLIC ON ISSUES RELATED TO BATTERING.
THE MINNESOTA LEGISLATION EXEMPLIFIES, ON A STATE LEVEL, THE POTENTIAL EFFEC-
TIVENESS OF FEDERAL LEGISLATION SUCH AS H. R. 2977. PRIOR TO THE PASSAGE OF THE
1977 LEGISLATION THERE WERE ONLY THO SHELTERS FOR BATTERED MOMEN IN THE STATE. BOTH
WERE LOCATED IN THE MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL METROPOLITAN AREA. CURRENTLY THERE ARE SEVEN
SHELTERS IN OPERATION. WITH THE SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE IN THE STATE'S COIY1ITMENT,TO
$3 MILLION IN 1980 - 81,AN ADDITIONAL NINE SHELTERS WILL OPEN BY DECEMBER OF THIS
YEAR.
STATE FUNDING HAS PROVIDED MANY GRASSROOTS VOLUNTEER GROUPS WITH THE CATALYST
NECESSARY TO SOLICIT AND RECEIVE LOCAL FINANCIAL SUPPORT IN TCMNS ACROSS THE STATE.
SEVERAL COMEUNITIES, ROCHESTER, Ik)PKINS, BURNSVILLE, MINNEAPOLIS, ~ ST. CLOUD, FOR
EXAMPLE, HAVE ALL CC(1MITED COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT FUMES TO PROVIDE FACILI-
TIES TO SERVE AS SHELTERS. OrHER COMP1UNITIES NAVE COMEITED RURAL DEVELOPMENT FUNDS,
CETA FUNDS, GENERAL ASSISTANCE FUNDS, MENTAL HEALTH FUNDS, AND TITLE XX MONIES. PRIVATE
PAGENO="0108"
102
FOUNDATIONS, CITIZEN GROUPS, UNITED WAY AGENCIES HAVE ALL JOINED IN THE EFFORT TO KEEP
LOCALLY ESTABLISHED SHELTERS OPERATING. STATE FUNDS REPRESENT FROM ONE-FOURTH TO
ONE-HALF OF A SHELTER'S OPERATING BUDGET IN ~1INNESOTA DEPENDING ON THE SHELTER SIZE
AND LOCATION, THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT STATE FUNDS HAVE GENERATED ItRE 11-IAN DOUBLE THEIR
AMOUNT IN LOCAL FINANCIAL CO~T1ITMENTS TO A PROBLEM ONCE CONSIDERED A PRIVATE MATTER AND
AN INAPPROPRIATE ARENA FOR COfrIIUNITY IHYOLVEMENT.
WHILE SHELTERS NEITHER SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF BATTERING NOR GUARANTEE THE PROTECTION
OF AU.. VICTIMS OF PARTNER ASSAULT, THEY ARE SYNGOLS IN A C&TIUNITY OF THE RIGHT OF ALL
PEOPLE TO BE PHYSICALLY PROTECTED BY THE SOCIETY IN WHICH THEY LIVE. Ti-IEY ARE A CONSTANT
REMINDER TO THE JUDICIAL, MEDICAL AND SOCIAL SERVICE SYSTEM OF THE NEED FOR CHANGE IN
THE POLICY AND ATTI11JDES OF THOSE SYSTEMS TOWARD THE VICTIMS OF ONE OF THIS SOCIETY'S
MOST DEVASTING AND ARCHAIC PRACTICES--WIFE-BEATING.
WITH FBI EXCEPTIONS, THE STATE FUNDING IS GRANTED TO LOCALLY-BASED GRASSROOTS
ORGANIZATIONS FOR TI-I~EE REASONS. FIRST, GRASSROOTS ORGANIZATIONS CAN PROVIDE HOUSING
AND ADVOCACY FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN AT A MUCH LOWER COST THAN TRADITIONAL AGENCIES.
SECOND, A GRASSROOTS APPROACH MAXIMIZES THE USE OF EXISTING SOCIAL SERVICE AGENCIES
AND PREVENTS DUPLICATION OF SERVICES. kID FINALLY, THIS APPROACH ENCOURAGES THE PARTI-
CIPATION OF FORMER VICTIMS, THUS MAINTAINING A PERSPECTIVE THAT DOES NOT SLIP INTO
BLAMING THE VICTIM FOR THE ABUSE HE OR SHE HAS EXPERIENCED.
THERE ARE OVER Lb GRASSROOTS ORGANIZATIONS CURRENTLY EXISTING IN THE STATE OF
MINNESOTA MUCH PROVIDE INDIVIDUAL AND CLASS ADVOCACY FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN, EDUCATE
COLTIUNITIES ON ISSUES RELATED TO BATTERING, AND HOUSE, EITHER IN SECURED FACILITES, SUCH
AS SHELTERS OR SAFE HOME SYSTEMS, VICTIMS OF PARTNER ASSAULT. BY LIMITING THEIR ROLES
TO HOUSING WOMEN AND CHILDREN AND PROVIDING ADVOCACY FOR WOMEN AND CHILDREN WITHIN
THE SYSTEM WE HAVE SUCCESSFULLY AVOIDED DEVELOPING AN ALTERNATIVE SOCIAL SERVICE SYSTEM
AND HOPEFULLY ARE DEVELOPING PERMANENT CHANGES IN THE SYSTEM TO EFFECTIVELY WORK WITH
ALL VICTIMS OF FAMILY VIOLENCE, NOT JUST THOSE REFERRED TI-ROUGH SHELTERS.
IN THE EFFORT TO BUILD WITHIN THE PRESENT SYSTEM AN AWARENESS OF HOW POLICY AND
PRACTICE CAN PERPETUATE THE PROBLEM OF FAMILY VIOLENCE, MORE AND WORE WE FIND PROFES
PAGENO="0109"
103
SIONALS AND THE C(YT~1UNITY-AT-LARGE DEVELOPING THE SKILLS NECESSARY TO EFFECTIVELY WORK
WITH INDIVIDUALS AND TOWARD ULTIMATE ELIMINATION OF SUCH VIOLENCE. MINNESOTA SHELTERS,
FOR EXAMPLE, DO NOT PROVIDE DIRECT LEGAL ASSISTNACE TO RESIDENTS NOR MEDICAL CARE, NOR
SPECIALIZED COUNSELING TO SHELTER RESIDENTS. IN THE PAST THO YEARS THIS CLASS ADVOCACY
APPROACH HAS RESULTED IN SIGNIFICANT CHANGESJ HOSPITALS THEOUGHOUT THE STATE HAVE DE-
VELOPED SPECIALIZED PROTOCALS IN EMERGENCY ROOMS FOR VICTIMS OF PHYSICAL ASSAULT WITHIN
FAMILIES. POLICE AND SHERIFF DEPARTMENTS HAVE SPONSORED WITH SHELTERS SPECIALIZED
TRAINING IN HANDLING DOMESTIC CALLS. COUNSELORS AND THERAPISTS HAVE WORKED WITH SHELTER
STAFFS AND RESIDENTS TO DEVELOP NEW METHODS OF COUNSELING BOTH THE VICTIMS AND THE
ASSAILANTS OF FAMILY VIOLENCE, GRADUALLY CHANGING THE PREVAILING ATTITUDE THAT THE
VICTIM SOMEHOW ENABLES THE BATTERER'S VIOLENT BEHAVIOR OR IS MERELY A PARTICIPANT IN
THE SO-CALLED DYSFUNCTIONAL FAMILY, MAJOR LEGISLATION HAS BEEN PASSED GIVING BOTH THE
POLICE AND COURTS MERE EFFECTIVE TOOLS TO WORK WITH WHEN FACING CASES IIWOLVING FAMILY
VIOLENCE.
THE SECOND PROVISION IN THE MINNESOTA LEGISLATION, WHICH IS SIMILAR TO THIS PRO-
POSED LEGISLATION, IS THE CREATION OF A STATEWIDE TASK FORCE TO ASSURE CITIZEN PARTI-
CIPATION IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE LEGISLATION THE 18-Mai~ER TASK FORCE ESTABLISHED
IN IIINNESOTA HAS PROVIDED THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, THE STATE ADMINISTERING AGENCY-
WITH ONLY THO FULL-TIME STAFF POSITIONS-WITH THE EXPERTISE NECESSARY TO IMPLEMENT THIS
LEGISlATION. Fwri' PERCENT OF THE TASK FORCE MEMBERS ARE FROM RURAL AREAS. ONE-THIRD
OF THE TASK FORCE MEMBERS REPRESENT MINORITY CO(TIUNTIES. CN'ER ONE-THIRD ARE PEOPLE WHO
HAVE PERSONALLY EXPERIENCED VIOLENCE IN THEIR FAMILIES. FIn'i' PERCENT OF THE TASK FORCE
MEMBERS ARE MEMBERS OF NON-PROFIT ADVOCACY OR SHELTER ORGANIZATIONS.
ONLY 5.5 PERCENT OF THE 1980 - 81 $3-IIILLION BUDGET FOR THE STATE PROGRAM IS
ALLOCATED TO ADMINISTRATION OF TI-B PROGRAM. THAT LOW FIGURE 15 ONLY POSSIBLE BECAUSE
OF THE WORKING NATURE OF THE TASK FORCE WHICH IS ONLY REIMBURSED FOR DIRECT EXPENSES
(TRAVEL, LODGING, AND FOOD). WHILE THE PROPOSED FEDERAL LEGISLATION DOES REQUIRE STATES
TO "SET FORTH PROCEDURES TO ASSURE ACTIVE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION WITHIN THE STATE" IT DOES
t~OT REQUIRE THE INVOLVEMENT OF FOF~IER VICTIMS NOR PEOPLE OF DIVERSE ECONOMIC AND CULTURAL
49 9i4-79------8
PAGENO="0110"
104
~ACKGROUtDS, BASED ON OUR EXPERIENCE IN WORKING WITH A TASK FORCE, BOTH OF THOSE RE-~
QUIREMENTS ARE HIGHLY RECCWiENDED THEIR PARTICIPATION IS ALSO CRUCIAL IN THE CREATION
OF ANY FEDERAL INTER-AGENCY COUNCIL, SUCH A COUNCIL) AS DEFINED IN SECTION 10 OF H. R.
2977, CAN BE EXTREMELY BENEFICIAL TO ORGANIZATIONS TI-BOUGHOUT THE COUNTRY IN ThEIR
EFFORTS TO EFFECT CHANGES IN FEDERAL POLICIES LOCAL HOUSING AU1}ORITIES, SHELTERS,
AND ORGANIZATIONS ACROSS THE COUNTRY SPENT OVER TED YEARS AND MANY PEOPLE HOURS TO HAKE
THE CHANGES IN1HE COMEUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT GUIDELINES TO ALLOU FOR THE USE
OF COHRUNITY DEVELOPMENT FUNDS TO PURCHASE AND REHABILITATE BUILDINGS FOR SHELTERS. THE
EXISTENCE OF SUCH A COUNCIL AND THE NATIONAL CLEARINGHOUSE COULD HAVE GREATLY FACILI-
TATED THAT EFFORT. CURRENT EFFORTS TO MAKE CHANGES IN SECTION 8 GUIDELINE, TITLE XX
FUNDING, ACTION GUIDELINES COULD ALL BENEFIT FROM SUCH A COUNCIL.
IN RESPECT TO THE PROVISIONS RELATIVE TO THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS, I HAVE THREE
COV~IENTS, FIRST, I BELIEVE THAT SOME CHANGES COULD BE USEFUL IN SECTION 3, MUCH STATES
THAT GRANTS CANNOT BE MADE IN EXCESS OF 25 PERCENT OF A PROGRAM'S ANNUAL BUDGET UNLESS
THE PROGRAM IS IN EXISTANCE FOR LESS THAN ONE YEAR. IN OUR EXPERIENCE IN MINNESOTA, AND
I BELIEVE THE SAME IS TRUE FOR PENNSYLVANIA, ME HAVE FOUND THAT, PARTICULARLY IN RURAL
AREAS, SHELTERS OR ADVOCACY PROGRAMS TAKE A FULL YEAR OF OPERATION BEFORE THE COMMUNITY
RECOGNIZES THE LEGITIMACY OF THE PROGRAMS AND BEGINS TO ACCEPT SOME FINANCIAL RE-
SPONSIBILITY FOR THEM. THERE IS STILL A VERY PREVALENT BELIEF THAT BATTERING DOES NOT
HAPPEN IN RURAL AREAS AND TEAT SHELTERS PROMOTE ThE BREAKUP OF FAMILIES, IN MINNESOTA
WE HAVE FOUND THAT AFTER 12 TO 18 MONTHS OF OPERATION, SEVERAL NON-URBAN SHELTERS
OR ADVOCACY GROUPS ARE RECEIVING BROAD-BASED COMMUNITY SUPPORT AS PEOPLE RECOGNIZE THAT
VIOLENCE NOT SHELTERS BREAK UP FAMILIES AND THAT VIOLENCE IS IN FACT A REALITY IN RURAL
AREAS. WE WOULD SUGGEST THAT DURING THE FIRST TED YEARS OF FUNDING THROUGH THIS LEGIS-
LATION, ORGANIZATIONS BE ELIGIBLE TO APPLY FOR UP TO 50 PERCENT OF THEIR ANNUAL BUDGETS.
Ii IS OUR ASSUNPTION THAT THE INTENT OF THE STATEMENT IN THIS SECTION, "THAT A GRANT
AWARDED TO AN ENTITY WHICH HAS NOT BEEN IN OPERATION FOR MERE THAN ONE YEAR MAY EQUAL
liP. TO 50 PERCENT", PAGE 9, LINES 3 AND 14, IS IN REFERENCE NOT TO THE EXISTENCE OF TI-lB
t~ON-PROFIT CORPERATION BUT TI-B DATE THAT THE PROGRAMING FOR 11-11CM FUNDING IS SOUGI-IT
PAGENO="0111"
105.
~EC~E FULLY OPERATIONAL1 PERI-IAPs LANGUAGE CLARIFYING THIS POINT IS NECESSARY,
SECONDLY, AGAIN IN SECTION 3, PAGE 6~ LINES 3 TI-I~OUGH 5, WE ARE PLEASED TO SEE
THAT THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION ALLOMS THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OF THE STATE TO SPECIFY
WHICH STATE AGENCY HE OR SHE WILL CHOOSE TO ADMINISTER THE STATE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
PROGRAM UNDER THIS ACT As YOU KNOW SEVERAL STATES HAVE PASSED LEGISLATION AND HAVE
ALREADY DEVELOPED STATE PROGRAMS EACH OF THOSE STATES HAVE IN THEIR LEGISLATION DESIG-
NATED ADMINISTERING STATE AGENCIES, AND FEDERAL LEGISLATION WHICH WOULD HAVE REQUIRED
FUNDING TO BE ADMINISTERED TI-ROUGH A PARTICULAR STATE AGENCY WOULD HAVE CREATED CONFUSION,
DUPLICATION OF EFFORTS, AND COULD POTENTIALLY BE DISTRUPTIVE TO ESTABLISHED STATE PRO-
GRAMS. WE SUPPORTTHIS PROVISION REMAINING UNALTERED IN THE PROPOSED LEGISLATION
REGARDLESS OF THE VEHICLE H. E. W. CHOOSES TO USE FCR ALLOCATING MONIES TO THE STATE,
FINALLY, NY LAST COMMENT IN TERMS OF THE ALLOCATION OF FUNDS ARE IN REGARDS TO
THE PROPOSED AMOUNTS OF FEDERAL FUNDING. THE DATA COLLECTED THROUGH THE MINNESOTA
PROGRAM DEMONSTRATED THE NEED FOR A MINIMUM OF 15 SHELTERS IN THE STATE. BASED ON
REPORTS RECEIVED FORM LAW ENFORCB~ENT, MEDICAL, AND SOCIAL SERVICE PROVIDERS, OVER AN 8-
MONTH PERIOD, WE HAVE CONSERVATIVELY ESTIMATED THAT THERE WERE OVER 27,000 INCIDENCES c'F
ASSAULTS ON WOMEN BY THEIR PARTNERS IN MINNESOTA LAST YEAR. OVER 65 PERCENT OF THE
VICTIMS HAVE BEEN EXPERIENCING CONTINUAL ASSAULT FOR OVER ONE YEAR. OVER 80 PERCENT
OF THE VICTIMS HAD CHILDREN. ABUSE CROSSED ALL AGE, RACE, AND GEOGRAPHIC LINES, AND
RANGED IN SEVERITY FROM BRUISES TO DEATH. DURING THE SAME TIME PERIODJ 79 PERCENT OF
THE WOMEN SEEKING SHELTER WERE TURNED AlLAY DUE TO LACK OF SPACE.
SUPPORTED BY DATA GATHERED OVER THE FIRST 18 MONTHS OF THE STATE PROGRAM, PRO-
FESSIONALS FROM ALL FIELDS, AND COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS IN ALL REGIONS OF THE STATE;
GOVERNOR ALBERT QUIE WADE THE EXPANSION OF THIS PROGRAM A TOP PRIORITY IN HI-S LEGIS-
LATIVE EFFORTS DURING THE 1979 SESSION. GOV. QUIE SUBMITTED A BUDGET FOR $2~7 MILLION
TO FUND A SHELTER IN EACH OF THE STATE'S 10 METRO ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT REGIONS AND
FIVE METRO SHELTERS His BUDGET ALSO EXPANDED THE STATE'S COMMUNITY EDUCATION PROGRAM
AND CALLED FOR SPECIAL PROGRAMMING FOR THE VIOLENT PARTNER. THE LEGISLATURE RESPONDED
THE THE GOVERNOR'S REQUEST FOR EXPANDED FUNDING BY APPROVING A TOTAL BUDGET OF $3-HILL~oN
PAGENO="0112"
1o6~
TI-B GOVERNOR ~iio THE LEGISLATORS INTEN) THIS $3-flIu~IoN CCtMITHENI TO BE A LONG-TERM
BUDGET ITEM.
LIKEWISE, WE ANTICIPATE THAT THE FEDERAl. GoV~pi-~N-r WILL FIND THAT, IN A TIME i-I-EN
OVER ~4O PERCENT OF THE WOMEN AND II PERCENT OF THE MEN IN THIS COUNTRY THAT ARE
MURDERED ARE KIU~ED BY THEIR PARTNERS. WHEN ONE IN EVERY FIVE MARRIAGES INVOLVES
VIOLENCE, WHEN OVER ONE-HALF OF THE CHILDREN WHO GROW UP IN VIOLENT 1-OMES BECOME
ABUSERS OR VICTIMS THEMSELVES IN ADULT RELATIONSHIPS AND IN A TIME WHEN OUR JAILS
Ai-fl) PRISONS ARE FILLED WITH MEN AND WOMEN WHO GREW UP IN PHYSICALLY AND SEXUALLY
ABUSIVE HOMES, FAMILY VIOLENCE CAN NO LONGER BE CONSIDERED A PRIVATE MATTER. T~E
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MUST TAKE THE LEAD IN PROVIDING FINANCIAL AID. STATE GOVERNEENTS
MUST FOLLOW. AND LOCAL COUNUNITIES MUST TAKE THE ULTIMATE RESPONSIBILITY TO CREATE AN
ENVIRONMENT IN WHICH THERE IS NO PLACE FOR VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN AND AGAINST FAMILY
MEMBERS. VIOLENCE WITHIN FAMILIES IS A REFLECTION OF A LARGER SOCIETAL ATTITUDE THAT
THE PHYSICALLY AND PSYCHOLOGICALLY VULNERABLE, PRIMARILY WOMEN AND CHILDREN, BUT ALSO
MEN, CAN BE THE PUNCHING BAGS FOR THOSE SEEKING TO FIND CONTROL IN THEIR LIVES THEOUGH
PHYSICAL VIOLENCE.
WHILE THIS LEGISLATION PROVIDES MUCH OF THE INCENTIVE TO STATE AND LOCAL COM-
MUNITIES TO TAKE THE RESPONSIBILITY, IT IS ONLY Ti-B BEGINNING OF THE FUNDING NEEDED
TO EFFECTIVELY WORK TOWARD THE TREMENDOUS CHANGES THAT MUST OCCUR IN THIS NATION.
IT'S EMPHASIS ON CONNUNITYBASED PROGRAtT4ING, ON STATE INVOLVEMENT, ON CITIZEN PARTICI-
PATION, ON NOT CREATING PROGRAMS WHICH ARE TOTALLY DEPENDENT ON FEDERAL FUNDING, ARE ALL
EXCELLENT FEATURES OF THIS LEGISLATION.
1~. CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS OF THE SUBCOI4IIUEE, I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR THIS
OPPORTUNITY TO TESTIFY TODAY AND MJRE IMPORTANTLY, THANK YOU FOR YOUR EFFORTS TO CONFRONr,
i-I-tAT FOR ALL OF US IS A PERSONALLY DIFFICULT ISSUE TO DEAL WITH T1-ROt)3H LEGISLATION.
PAGENO="0113"
107
STATEMENT OP ELLEN PENCE, STATE DIRECTOR 0]? BATTERED
WOMEN'S PROGRAMS, DEPARTMENT 0]? CORRECTIONS, ST. PAUL,
MINN.
Ms. PENCE. My name is Ellen Pence. I am the State Director of
Minnesota Programs for Battered Women. I, too, thank you for the
opportunity today to testify before this committee.
In 1977 and 1978, the Minnesota State Legislature passed legisla~
tion very similar to t'his bill in its purpose. The Minnesota legislation,
allocating $625,000, had four major provisions.
First, the legislation allocated moneys to find four or more shelters
in both urban and rural areas in the State.
Second, it provided for the establishment of an 18-member ad-
visory task force of professionals and grassroots people with ex-
perience in working with battered women.
Third, it required all social serivce, law enforcement, and medical
personnel to report; incidences of battering to the administrating
State agency for the purpose of determining the need for continued
and/or expanded State funding. I believe we are the only State that
requires a systematic reporting of battering.
Fourth and finally, it provided funds to conduct a statewide edu-
cational program for both professionals and the public on issues
related to battering.
The Minnesota legislation exemplifies, on a State level, the potential
effectiveness of Federal legislation such as this. Prior to the passage
of the 1977 legislation, there were only two shelters for battered women
in the State. Both were located in the Minneapolis/St. Paul metro-
politan area. Currently there are seven shelters in operation. With
the substantial increase in the State's commitment during 1980-Si to
$3 million, an additional nine shelters will open by December of this
year.
State funding has provided many grassroots volunteer groups with
the catalyst necessary to solicit and receive local financial support in
towns across the State. Several communities, Rochester, Hopkins,
Burnsville, Minneapolis, and St. Cloud, for example, have all com-
mitted dommunity development block grant funds to provide facilities
to serve as shelters.
Other communities have committed rural development funds, CETA
funds~ general assistance funds, mental health funds, and title XX
moneys. Private foundations, citizen groups, United Way agencies have
all joined in the effort to keep locally established shelters operating.
State funds represent from one-fourth to one-half of a shelter's
operating budget in Minnesota~ depending on the shelter size and loca-
tion. There is no doubt that State funds have generated more than
double their amount in local financial commitments to a problem
once considered a private matter and an inappropriate arena for com-
munitv involvement.
While shelters neither solve the problem of battering nor guarantee
the protection of all victims of partner assault, they are symbols in a
community of the right of all people to be physically protected by the
society in which tihev live. They are a constant reminder to the judicial,
medical, and social service system of the need for change in the policy
PAGENO="0114"
108
unci attitudes of those systems toward the victims of one of th'is so~
ciety's most devastating crimes.
With few exceptions, the State funding is granted to locally based
grassroots organizations for three reasons. First, grassroots organiza-
tions can provide `housing and advocacy `for women and children `at a
much lower cost than traditional agencies. Second, a grassroots ap-
proach maximizes the use of existing social service agencies. It serves
to confront the inappropriate practices of these agencies.
Finally, this approach encourages the participation of former vic-
tims, thus maintaining a perspective that does not slip into blaming the
victim for the abuse he or she `has experienced.
In the `past 3 years, the `class advocacy approach of shelters `has re-
sulted in very significant changes in existing social services and law
enforcement agencies around the State. Hospitals throughout the State
have developed specialized protocols in emergency rooms for battered
women. Police and sheriffs departments have sponsored with shelters
specialized training in the handling of domestic calls.
Counselors and therapists have worked wit'h shelter staffs and resi-
dents to develop new methods of `counseling both victims and th~
assailants of ba'ttering, gradually changing the prevailing attitude
that the victim somehow enables the batt.erer's violent behavior, or is
merely a participant in the so-called dysfunctional family. Major leg-
islation in Minnesota has been passed, giving both the police and the
courts more effective tools to work with when facing cases involving
battering.
The second provision in the Minnesota legislation, which is similar
to this proposed legislation, is the creation of a statewide task force to
assure citizen participation in the implementation of the legislation.
The 18-member task force h'a~s provided the Department of Corrections,
the State `administering agency-with only two full-time staff provi-
sions-with the expertise necessary to implement this legislation.
Fifty percent of the task force members are from rural areas. One-
third of the task force members represent minority communities. Over
one-third are people who have personally experienced family violence.
Fifty percent of the task force members are members of nonprofit
advocacy or shelter organizations.
While the proposed Federal legislation does require States to set
forth procedures to assure active citizen participation, it does not re-
quire the involvement of former victims nor people of diverse economic
and cultural backgrounds to be on those committees.
Based on our experience in working with a task force, both of
those requirements a,re highly recommended. Their participation is
also crucial in the creation of any Federal interagency council, such
as defined in this legislation.
In respect to the provisions relative to the allocation of funds, I
have three comments. First, I believe that some changes could be
useful in section 3, which states that grants cannot be made in excess
of 25 percent of a program's annual budget unless the program is in
existence for not less than 1 year.
In our experience in Minnesota, and I believe the same is true
for Pennsylvania and other States, we have found that, particularly
in rural areas, shelters or advocacy programs take a full year of opera-
PAGENO="0115"
109
tion before the community recognizes the legitimacy of the program
and begins to accept some financial responsibility for them.
There is still a very prevalent belief that battering does not happen
in rural areas and that shelters promote the breakup of families. In
Minnesota, we have found that after 12 to 18 months of operation,
several nonurban shelters or advocacy groups are receiving broad-
based community support as people recognize that violence, not shel-
ters, break up families and that battering is, in fact, a reality in rural
areas.
We would suggest that, during the first 2 years of funding through
this legislation, organizations be eligible to apply for up to 50 percent
of their annual budgets. It is our assumption that the intent of the
statement in this section "that a grant awarded to an entity which
has not been in operation for more than 1 year may equal up to 50
percent," page 9, lines 3 and 4, is in reference, not to the existence
of the nonprofit corporation, but the date that the programing for
which funding is sought became fully operational. Perhaps language
clarifying this point is necessary.
Second, again in section 3, page 6, lines 3 through 5, we are pleased
to see that the proposed legislation allows the chief executive of the
State to specify which State agency he or she will choose to administer
the State domestic violence program under this act.
As you know, several States have passed legislation and have al-
ready developed State programs. Each of those States have in their
legislation designated administering State agencies, and Federal leg-
islation which would have required funding to be administered
through a particular State agency would have created confusion, dup-
lication of efforts, and could potentially be disruptive to established
State programs.
We support this provision remaining unaltered in the proposed
legislation regardless of the vehicle HEW chooses to use for allocat-
ing money to the State. It is my understanding that HEW is con-
sidering putting some of this money through the title XX funding
process, and we are particularly interested in keeping that part of the
legislation which allows the executive of the State to choose which
State agency to administer the body.
In Minnesota, for example, if the money came through and it was
required that the Department of Welfare administer the body, we
would then have two different State agencies administering funds for
battered women.
Finally, my last comment is in terms of the allocation of funds and
in regard to the proposed amounts of Federal funding. The data
collected through the Minnesota program demonstrated the need for
a minimum of 15 shelters in the State. Based on reports received from
law enforcement, medical, and social service providers, over an 8-
month period we have conservatively estimated that there were over
27,000 incidents of assaults on women by their partners in Minnesota
last year.
Supported by data gathered over the first 18 months of the State
program, professionals from all fields and community organizations in
all regions of the State, Governor Albert Quie made the expansion
of this program a top priority in his legislative efforts during the 1979
PAGENO="0116"
110
session. Governor Quie submitted a budget for $2.7 million to fund
a shelter in each of the State's 10 non-metro economic development
regions and 5 metro shelters.
His budget also expanded the State's commurnty education pro-
gram and called for special programing for the violent partner. The
legislature responded to the Governor's request for expanded fund-
ing by approving a total budget of $3 million, $300,000 more than
the Governor was asking for.
Likewise, we anticipated that the Federal Government will find
that, in. a time when over 40 percent of the women and 11 percent of
the men in this country that are murdered are killed by their partners,
when one in every five marriages involves violence, when over one-
half of the children who grow up in violent homes become abusers
or, victims themselves in adult relationships, and in a time when. our
jails and prisons are filled with men and women who grew up in
physically and sexually abusive homes, domestic violence can no longer
be considered a private matter.
The Federal Government must take the lead in providing financial
aid; State governments must follow; and local communities must
take the ultimate responsibility to create an environment in which
there is no place for violence against women. Violence within families
is a reflection of a larger societal attitude that the physically and psy-
chologically vulnerable, primarily women and children, but ~also men,
can be the punching bags for those seeking to find control in their
lives through physical violence.
While this legislation provides much of the incentive to State and
local communities to take the responsibility, it is only the beginning
of the funding needed to effectively work toward the tremendous
changes that must occur in this Nation. Its emphasis on community-
based programing, on State involvement, on citizen participation,
on not creating programs which are totally dependent on Federal
funding, are all excellent features of this legislation.
Again, I would like to than you, Mr. Chairman and members of
the committee, for this opportunity to testify.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you. Thank both of you for your pertinent and
direct remarks to changes or lack of changes in the legislation before
us. I think it is going to be very helpfuL
I note with some int.erest that Al Quie used to serve on this sub-
committee and he went on to do good things in this field, and I see
Joe LeFante's name on the front of this brochure here. Joe is new to
the job, but if' you have any trouble, let us know because he sat
through these hearings last year and he ca.nnot plead ignorance of
the problem.
I assume from your testimony in a general sense that, even though
you both represent States where rather progressive steps have been
taken to expand the resources to individuals who find themselves in
this very difficult situation, you would still support this type of Fed-
eral legislation, given the cha.nges that you have recommended.
Would `you see a need for it within your own StateS not pleading
the case for other States who have refused to do anything for what-
ever reasons?
PAGENO="0117"
111
Ms. PENCE. Definitely. I think what this will do, the examples that
I gave in Minnesota, the kind of money that loosened up will happen
in other States. And in those States where funding is already avail-
able, it really is never enough. I think there is a lot of programing
that needs to happen in rural areas in Minnesota that will be able to
happen with additional funding from the Federal Government.
Mr. MILLER. You also testified-and one of my beliefs in writing
the legislation in this manner, with the 3-year period-although you
testify for more money for a little longer period of time in terms of
startup-was that these shelters do build a constituency. It appears
from your testimony and from others that there is a great hardship
in getting started, but once you get started and the community be-
comes aware, there does become a constituency for providing that
service.
Apparently, at some point it also becomes politically acceptable
in a really far-ranging community, from rural to urban to poor to
rich, that finally there is a political reality that this is a problem,
and you can build some financial support I am talking about for the
continuation of the shelters.
Is it realistic for us to talk in 3-year terms; that by the end of
3 years, the shelter either is going to have community support or it is
not? I am not sure we should have the Federal Government out there
continuing to support a shelter which does not find support in the
community.
Ms. PENCE. I think that, more realistically, a 5-year program
would be a much more realistic program. For example, in Minnesota,
shelters existed for several years before the State was willing to make
the commitment. It has been 7 years of building a program in Min-
nesota where there is finally a recognition of the problem, and coin-
munities are willing to put money into those programs.
Another area. The Federal board that is going to be created in
this legislation allows us to start loosening up other kinds of Federal
money. It took over 2 years to get the community development block
grant funding regulations changed to allow for the use of those
funds for shelters for battered women, and we anticipate, with this
kind of a Federal board, that we would be able to make a lot more
changes. For example, title XX money, the CETA bill, and those
kinds of moneys could be loosened up, and specific funding for these
kinds of programs would not be necessary, once we were able to
loosen up a lot of Federal money.
Mr. MILLER. Let me come back for your response also. My hope
would be that today is different than 5 years ago, so that other States,
other communities would benefit by the New Jersey experience, by
the Minnesota experience, and would not suffer that 7-year period
or, as we have seen in California, a shelter exists for a few months
and dies out; they try again, it goes for a year and dies out; that that
situation is changing.
We have changed the law in regard to titTe XX in terms of shelters
for adults. CETA has been changed to some extent, and it has been
made more easy to get CETA people in the shelters. ACTION Agency
has taken some steps to try to provide volunteers for these shelters.
PAGENO="0118"
112
So the concern here is trying to limit that Federal role to getting
the thing started and give them some financial breathing room as
they look around to coordinate these other services, and then moving
on and trying to do that in other areas where the services are needed.
You see the difference in trying to do that. Hopefully there is some
benefit from what you ha.ve shown the rest of the country. I think it
would be very difficult to get Congress to go along with a 5-year pro-
gram. As much as I would support it, I don't think that that is the
nature here. I just wonder if that is realistic, though. The burden may
not be so great in the next State as it was in your two States to get it
going.
Ms. ALLEN. I think that I would tend to agree with your analysis
of the situation. I would think that the more and more experiences
that we have developed that are exchanged between people who have
developed those-as you spoke about the community block develop-
ment grant that opened up. That opened up in New Jersey. That also
permitted one of our groups to become fully funded.
So it would appear to me that, based upon the experiences, the 3-year
situation that you talk about here is one that would permit giving a
credibility to the issue, you know, from the Federal level. Based upon
that, I am sure that you would find more and more groups going out
to the community and picking up their own funding.
I might tell you that, to a very large extent, many of these areas
do want to be totally funded by themselves.
Mr. MILLER. I am aware of that. We have been in a number of
arguments on that issue.
Mr. Kramer?
Mr. KRAMER. What vehicle do you see this bill doing, other than
providing a ~iew mechanism for funding? Most of the thrust of your
comments has been: We need the extra money, we need additional
money, there is not enough money ultimately available in the State
now to provide the services you think need to be provided.
I would like for you to list what benefits this bill would provide,
in your judgment, without any funding attached to it. For example,
if we were to pass a bill without the grant mechanism in it, would that
be of value? And if so, how?
Ms. ALLEN. I don't think, without funding at the present time, it
would. No; I believe that, in order to help people who have been
volunteering, such as they have, to maintain an establishment, to set
up an establishment, that it takes, in my language, hard, cold cash
first to do that. I think that is a `base necessity, and then, moving from
that, I think it also presents an educational value to the people because,
as the funding comes along, the kind of reporting that I think I heard
you talk about earlier this morning becomes a necessity. And as that
`becomes a necessity, there is better planning. There is better use of
community groups so that they can extend themselves in that direction.
As they can show to people within the community results, then
they have the opportunity to attract other moneys. But I think they
need that cash first.
Mr. KRAMER. Ms. Allen, I have one other question for you, and
that involves your suggestion that the definition section be changed.
Would you tell me specifically why you want to do that, and what
class of persons you think that change ought to be directed to?
PAGENO="0119"
113
Ms. ALIEN. Well, I referred to two definitions to be changed. You
are talking about the definition of the victim?
Mr. KRAMER. Of domestic violence.
Ms. ALLEN. Yes. I think that the original definition that we now
seek to change really means that you would extend it, so that we do
not take into consideration only those people who are termed "legally
married."
Mr. KRAMER. Why is that?
M5. ALLEN. I think there is a changing role in our society today.
I heard it expressed by the gentleman who was here just a few
minutes ago from the Navy. I think that, as Americans moving in
this society, we have to recognize different ways of life and different
modes of living. I don't believe that those in any way take away the
hurt of the violence that occurs as a result of people who have been
living together.
Mr. KRAMER. Isn't the basis of this bill, though, to provide a mech-
anism short of the criminal courts to take care of some of these prob-
lems? If that is the case, of course, when there is a legal relationship,
there are obviously difficulties involved that go beyond the mere as-
sault-tlie children, the two people's financial obligations, and all
the other things that sometimes make it difficult or are impediments
to disengagement.
But in the case of people who are not married, it seems to me, the
simple solution to someone who is getting beat upon is to move.
Ms. ALLEN. It sounds like a very simple solution to a big problem,
but as a result of those people who have been living together, there
can be children there. There can be the result of physical violence on an
individual. And I believe that not only the subject we are trying to
treat here has to be treated, but, as changes are made in our society,
many other laws have to be treated. I am sure we will see those hap-
pening in the future.
Mr. KRAMER. I appreciate your explanation. I don't agree with you,
but I appreciate your explanation.
Mr. MILLER. Do you want to respond to that?
Ms. PENCE. Yes. I have one comment. I think a man can pursue a
woman, harass a woman, and beat a woman just as easily if she leaves
the situation, whether they are or are not married. There is very lit-
tie difference to two people living in an intimate relationship whether
they are married or not. The economic dependency, the emotional de-
pendency, and the continued harassment of women trying to get out of
those situations remain the same.
In Minnesota, in the data we have collected, 65 percent of the women
who were assaulted were legally married and living with their partner
at the time. Another 15 percent were legally divorced or separated and
were still being pursued. The rest of the people were not living with
their assailants, or never had lived with their assailants.
Mr. KRAMER. I don't see how the establishment of a shelter facility
prevents someone from following someone and harassing them, regard-
less of whether they are married or not. It seems to me that yes, you
would have a place to go for counseling, you would have a place to go to
find out what your other alternatives are. You would have a place to
go so that on a temporary basis you could remove yourself from the
situation. But on a permanent basis, there has got to be something other
PAGENO="0120"
114
than governmental involvement that is going to be a force to keep one
person from harassing another.
Ms. PENCE. I think that one of the problems is most of the times
~when people testify in terms of the role of the shelter, they testify in
terms of the individual women who are served there. In shelters in
:M1m~50ta, for example, there are between 400 and 500 people who are
housed in a year in a shelter.
The primary purpose of a shelter, besides servicing those individual
women, is to make changes within the current system, make changes
in the way that law officers respond to domestics, the way that the court
systems provide protection, that the kind of sentencing due to batterers,
trying to require more sentencing into counseling-mandatory coun-
seling-or jail sentences if people refuse to go into counseling.
So it is that kind of class advocacy that a shelter provides in addi-
tion to that individual caring for the individual victims of family vio-
lence. And it is a class advocacy which will eventually get to providing
a system in which, in any community, violence is not condoned, and
that every part of that community-from the police officer to the courts
to the social service people-responds in a way which clearly gives the
message to the man that there are serious consequences to physically
abusing a woman, regardless of their relationship.
Mr. KRAMER. That is what we have a criminal law for. isn't it?
Ms. PENCE. There are no serious consequences now for a ma*n abusing
his wife traditionally in this country. It is one of the least prosecuted
crimes in this country.
Mr. KRAMER. But why is that?
Ms. PENCE. it is the safest place for a man to vent his anger.
Mr. KRAMER. Isn't the reason a lot of prosecution never takes place is
because the victim will not testify? In the majority of cases, that has
been my experience.
MS. PENCE. That is part of the reason. One of the primary reasons
victims do not testify is because the result of their testimony is fairly
negligible. Most sentencing for fairly serious crimes comes to stayed
sentences, $25 fines, $100 fines. And to go through a 6-week to 6-month
judicial process in which you are continually being harassed and
threatened to end up with a $100 fine against your husband does not
show that the courts are effectively responding to that woman's need
to try t*o get him some kind of help and to provide physical protection
for herself.
The only place that provides the physical protection is a shelter, and
that is only a temporary place. The goal is to try to get through the
court system a.nd the law enforcement system continued physical pro-
tection for that woman.
Mr. KRAMER. How are you going to do that?
Ms. PENCE. By having more serious consequences to his continued
battering. Men who batter can be cured through counseling. However,
there has been no place in the country where just counseling has shown
to be an effective way of dealing with batterers. That has to be accom-
panied by serious consequences if they fail to continue in that counsel-
ing situation. And that is what is not there, the serious consequence.
In aicoholism there are all sorts of harmful consequences. You lose
~rour job. You hit the bottom. But in battering there are no harmful
consequences. We have not made the privilege that many men have of
PAGENO="0121"
115
being able to abuse their wives appear to be not such a privilege. There
are very few consequences to battering in this country, and that is
what we are trying to change. And that can be done, but only when a
whole community changes their attitude.
Shelters symbolize that. They are the physical symbols in that corn-
munity that men are beating up women. That does happen in reverse,
too. Men do get battered. But it is a physical thing, right in the middle
of a community, that it is happening here and the community has to
respond. And you cannot ignore it when you have a shelter stuck in a
town of 10,000 people. It becomes a reality in everyone's life.
Mr. KRAMER. How long do you envision people staying in these
shelters?
Ms. PENCE. The average length of stay in Minnesota is 10 days. It
is normally anywhere from 2 hours to 2 nights to 30 days.
Mr. KRAMER. And what percent return to their home?
Ms. PENCE. I could give you an example. In one shelter in Minnesota,
which is the Duluth shelter, one-third of the women go out of the
shelter and find alternative housing and file for some kind of legal
separation, one-third return to the home with some significant changes
in the man's behavior, and one-third return to the home with no
changes in his behavior.
Mr. KRAMER. How long a period of time are you measuring the
changes in his behavior.
Ms. PENCE. One year.
Mr. KRAMER. Over a 1-year period?
Ms. PENCE. Yes.
Mr. MILLER. Mr. ErdahL
Mr. ERDAHL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I waiit to apologize to our witnesses this afternoon for not being
here. Like many Congressmen, I get several things scheduled at one
time, and especially to my fellow Minnesotan who is here today. I will
make a couple of comments on that without being overly self-righteous.
I think in Minnesota we have made some significant advances. I am
a former member of the legislature, and I think this last session pro-
vided good advances insofar as funding shelters. The one shelter with
which I am personally familiar, because I have been there, is the one
in Rochester.
At that time I had the opportunity to visit, not oniy with the coun-
selors and some of the people there, but also some of the people who
were being cared for. I guess I went into that meeting somewhat
naive. There may be many people in society, especially men, who think
that this is something that happens in the inner city and does not
happen in a peaceful rural town in southern Minnesota.
As you point out in your testimony, which I just read, it was there.
And some of the people I met were from some of these very peaceful
little towns, so it is something that reaches across our society. Hope-
fully we will deal responsibly with it and try to solve some of the
problems.
Thank you for being here today.
Ms. PENCE. Thank you.
Mr. MILLER. Ms. Mikuiski?
Ms. 1~{IKuLsKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
PAGENO="0122"
116
There have been several questions raised about funding during the
course of the hearing today, and one of the ones Congressman Kramer
has raised is what will happen when Federal bucks run out? There is
a reluctance on the part of the Congress to start programs where we
all say that they have ad hoc funding or time-limited funding, and
then we build a coalition for support and they come back.
If you had the opportumty to answer that question, how would you?
Ms. ALLEN. I would feel that once established and well based with
the help of Federal funding, tha.t the activity that would take place
would permit a sufficient amount of time and effort to go toward the
solicitation of other funding so that the thing that you suggest would
not occur. I would also hope that the Federal funding would be
administered in such a way that it would not be given to groups
~where it would appear that there was little, if any, hope of being
:able to retain it after a period of time. I think it has to have that kind
~of thinking in the disposition of the funds.
With those things both done, with the proper climate be.ing set, I
~would hope that the States would be able to pick up a share of the
funding and that through the use of groups in the community such as
the United Way, those other things that exist, we would be able to
maintain real viable groups.
Ms. MIKULSKI. So you really see on the long-term basis that pro-
grains such as this would be maintained at a local level through three
sources of funds: First, governmental at a couple of different levels;
second, the traditional volunteer social service sector, and some of
those would be, for example, the convent from Catholic charities; and
third, private initiatory fundraising efforts by, for example, the shel-
ter board itself. But you really need three. No one single source of
funding would either be adequate or wholesome.
MS. ALLEN. At the moment, I could not see that as adequate or
wholesome.
Ms. MIKuLSKI. The reason I say "wholesome" is I think a lot of
people get dependent on grants, and very often they lose their sense
of mission. I have seen that in some of the programs I helped start in
the sixties. I would like to get rid of the damn things now.
Ms. ALLEN. Because they get stale. They are not positively reviewed.
They are not addressing the problem. And we would prefer not to see
that happen.
I point out, for instance, in one shelter the State was able to pro-
vide the housing for the shelter at the rate of $1 per year, but that was
a great benefit and those were the kinds of things that I think we will
be able to do more in the communities.
Ms. Miuuisui. Ms. Pence.
Ms. PENCE. I guess my answer is similar. The one thing I would
add is the reason local communities begin to commit money to shelters
once they have been operating is they realize what a tremendous relief
they are to the systeiñ. The welfare department does not know what
to do with battered women. The poli'cB do not know what to do with
battered women. And all of a sudden you have this place which will
take those women and house them, and all of a sudden you have police-
men coming to testify at city council liea.rings: "Yes, we think you
should commit seed money: ~or this house." And when you get the head
PAGENO="0123"
117
of the St. Cloud Police Department up there defending women's rights,
it is an accomplishment. [General laughter.]
It does, in fact, raise the consciousness of the whole community. So
I think it has been a problem that social service agencies and law en-
forcement people have dealt with on a private basis, and now they are
coining out to make public testimony saying that we have to fund this
place because it is helping us.
So I think these Federal moneys are going to do that. As a shelter
gets started in some area where there is no State commitment, more
and more people are going to start backing it and asking their State
legislatures to loosen up money.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Thank you very much. I know time is running late
and we have some other witnesses, but I do appreciate that.
Ms. Alien, if you would give my regards to Mr. LeFante, we were
freshmen here together and we often joked that we lived together be-
cause we shared the same apartment building and the same floor. I
used to always borrow his corkscrew. He had a more efficient one. The
Italian one was more efficient than the Polish one. [General laughter.]
Ms. ALLEN. Far be it from me to start any rumors, but when I go
back I will tell him I met the other woman he was living with.
Mr. MILLER. Next we will hear from a panel of Cynthia Dames,
Geraldine Stahly, Janice Moore, and Ginger McMahon.
Welcome. For those of you who have statements, they will be put
in the record. So if you want to summarize them or change them, feel
free to do so during your oral presentation. Why don't you just identify
yourselves for the record, starting from left to right. You are first.
[The prepared statements of Cynthia Dames, Geraldine Stahly,
Janice Moore, and Ginger McMahon follow:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF CYNTHIA DAMES, BATTERED WOMEN'S PROJECT,
`SANTA FE, NEW MEXICO
Good morning, gentlemen: My name is Cynthia Dames. I am Chairperson
of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. I am from Santa Fe, New
Mexico, and the director there of a shelter program for victims of spouse assault.
In the past `two years, the people of this country have become aware of the
problem of violent attacks on women by their husbands, boyfriends, and adult
sons. The magnitude of the violence perpetrated on women in the home is not
yet fully understood by the public. The ramifications of this violence are not
entirely apparent, but it is clear that continued violence against women in this
society is intolerable. Women across this nation are calling a halt to the violence,
are rescuing battered women, and are helping women find alternatives to living
a life of terror at the hands of the men that they love.
Spousal assault is epidemic. It knows no class, race, religion, age, nor geo-
graphical region. We know that many of the women in this room today and a
maiority of the women that we each know are victims of domestic violence. This
violence may be merely a slap, punch or kick, but it is our experience that the
violence more likely includes burning, cutting with knives, attempted strangu-
lation, rape, facial disfigurement, and repeated and prolonged assault on the
breasts and stomach, frequently causing miscarriage or organic injury.
Last year in the State of Maryland, local law enforcement agencies received
15,312 complaints of spousal assault.
A shelter in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania has been receiving 100 calls each day
from women seeking shelter and support because they have been assaulted by
their husbands or boyfriends.
* One half of all couples in the United States have experienced physical violence
in their relationships.
Of the assault victims seeking medical assistance at the emergency room of a
Boston hospital, 70 percent were victims of domestic violence.
PAGENO="0124"
118
In its first year of operation, the Louisville, Kentucky shelter lodged 555~
women and children and answered 2,709 hot line calls.
The community-based shelter program in Orlando, Florida sheltered 149
women and children in a two month period in 1978.
Many shelters across the country are turning away victims of domestic
violence because of the lack of space. Some programs have found that they are
unable to house as many as 30 women and children requesting shelter each day.
In a recent report of the office of the Attorney General of the state of Ohio
came the startling revelation that although there were 16 shelters in that state,.
69 more were needed to meet the needs of victims of domestic assault. Thus, 82
percent of the need in Ohio was unmet.
Nonetheless, funding is meager. The St. Louis Abused Women's Support
Project is primarily funded from individual donations from $5-$100!
Most shelter programs began with one or two unpaid women coordinating the
efforts of a score of volunteers. Frequently, the shelter was the home of one of
the workers. Securing funding has allowed numbers of these groups to rent a
shelter facility, to meet operating expenses and to hire small staffs. Typically
the staff of a shelter will include a fundraiser/administrator, a house manager,.
a child-care worker, and a victim advocate. Volunteers continue to be the back-
bone of these shelters. Expansion of the staff in shelters of this size is essentiaL
to the continuity of the staff and the sustained energy of the volunteers; for most
staff people and many volunteers in shelter programs work at least 11 hours per
day, 6 days per week.
10,000 women and 20,000 children were sheltered or provided with other needed.
services by the 19 shelter programs affiliated with the Pennsylvania Coalition
Against Domestic Violence last year. None of these programs have permanent or
secure funding. All face the possibility of closing this year.
Fewer than 15 state legislatures across this country have enacted law providing
funding for shelters. Most of this legislation does not establish permanent funding-
mechanisms. Almost all of it is inadequate to meet the needs of shelter programs.
Approximately 70 percent of the existing shelters obtain funding from private
and local sources. Less than 50 percent receive any state or federal monies. Almost
all piece their budgets together from multiple funding sources.
Even for the most sophisticated shelter programs, securing secure funding-
has taken years. Women Advocates of Minneapolis/St. Paul worked 7 years
developing secure funding. Still, shelter programs in Minnesota must rely heav-
ily on local and private sources to complete their budgeting requirements.
Many states have not made monies available to shelter programs when it was
within their power to do so. Title 20 monies are virtually unobtainable for shelter-
programs in many states despite the recent amendments for adult protective
services. Cutbacks in Title 20 and the reallocation of available funds have caused
the temporary closing of a number of shelters across the country.
States need the incentives that H.R. 2977 provides. Clearly, most have not acted
on their own initiative to generate funds for domestic violence programs. How-
ever, we are certain that once they have participated in the grant process pro-
vided in this legislation, they will recognize the need to generate new monies or
reallocate appropriate funds to sustain the shelter programs.
Now let me turn my attention to who we are. The National Coalition Against
Domestic Violence represents many of the more than 400 community-based
shelter and hot-line programs all over the United States. Our programs provide
a multitude of services to battered persons. Those services include counseling,
child-care, agency advocacy, legal assistance, medical referral, court and police
accompaniment, housing assistance, emergency hot-line assistance, employment.
training and referral, parenting courses, budgeting and fiscal management assist-
ance, as well as sheltering. The philosophical underpinning of all these services-
is self-help. Victims helping victims. Growth through shared experience and
support. We believe that this is the most effective process for escaping the cycle
of violence and embracing a life free of the fear and immobility that the violence
creates.
The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence began as a concept dis-
cussed at the 1976 Domestic Violence Conference in Milwaukee. There was
strong feeling among the participants that the many existing and emerging-
shelter programs could benefit through association with each other to share
information, materials, problems, and skills. It was also agreed that there was a
growing need to organize on both statewide and national levels to bring the issue
of domestic violence to the attention of the public and to persuade government
PAGENO="0125"
119
leaders to make policies and pass legislation that assure the growth and develop-
ment of services to the victims of domestic violence and their children.
The National Coalition was formalized as an organization at the Civil Rights
Consultation on Domestic Violence held here in the District in March of 1978.
Hundreds of people representing battered women's programs from every state
in the Union participated in this exchange, and recognized the need to continue
a dialogue among community-based shelter programs. The Coalition was born.
We plan to return to Washington this October for a national meeting of the
membership of this grass-roots Coalition. At that time, and as we return home
this week, we intend to share with our constituents and with our Congressional
representatives our support of HR. 2977.
Thank you for your time.
WOMENSHELTER,
Long Beach, Calif., July 10, 1979.
SELECT EDUCATION SUBCOMMITTEE,
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR,
Cannon House Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MEMBER OF THE COMMITTEE: I have been asked to testify regarding the
need for the legislation pending before you which addresses the problem of
domestic violence. I am currently the Executive Director of WomenShelter, a
shelter borne for battered women and their children in Long Beach, California.
Concurrently, I am an Associate in Psychology at the University of California
at Riverside completing a doctoral dissertation in Social Psychology on the topic
of family violence and have published a review of the literature of spousal
violence. During the last two years, I have served as a member of the Los Angeles
County Board of Supervisors Task Force on Domestic Violence and have com-
pleted a survey of public agency response to this problem on a country-wide
basis as chairperson of the Needs Assessment/Attitude Survey Committee. I am
currently a member of the Southern California Coalition for Battered Women
and the newly formed Los Angeles County Domestic Violence Council. I have
conducted training seminars for law enforcement, criminal justice, social serv-
ices, mental health and health professionals. I am currently a consultant to the
Los Angeles City Attorney's office, the Los Angeles County District Attorney's
office, the Los Angeles County Department of Social Services and the California
State Department of Mental Health.
WomenShelter is a residental crisis facility for battered women and their
children, providing food, shelter, counseling, social service advocacy and child
care services. In addition, the shelter operates a 24 hr. Hotline crisis interven-
tion counseling service and out-of-house groups provide counseling to battered
women not needing shelter and to battering men.
WomenShelter began services in September, 1977. During the past 20 months,
000 women and children have been residents and an additional 3,000 individuals
have been served as Hotline callers and out-of-house counseling clients. The
average stay of residents in the shelter is 21 days, although a client may remain
until she can find safe permanent housing. In addition to direct client services,
WomenShelter has provided community education on family violence to 0,000
individuals, including seminars on domestic violence for 1,500 professionals in
law enforcement, criminal justice, social services, mental health and public
health.
All of these services have been provided on a budget of under $200,000 per
year. Funding for WomenShelter comes primarily through CETA VI ($150,000)
and GSA ($30,000) with the remaining $20,000 from private sources. If the
federal CETA and GSA dollars were to end, so would all of the services of
WomenShelter.
Seven shelters now exist in the Los Angeles County area and all but one is
funded in some way through Federal monies. Without these funds, shelter pro-
grams could not have survived beyond their meager beginnings as all volunteer
grass-roots efforts. If federal monies were withdrawn, or allocated for other
purposes at the discretion of City, County or State government, all but one
shelter program in Los Angeles County would probably cease. Havenhouse, the
oldest shelter for battered women in the country, has provided years of con-
tinuous service, to battered women and has developed extensive private support
that constitutes 30 percent of their buchmt.
40-914-79-9
PAGENO="0126"
120
All of the shelters in Los Angeles County provide food, shelter and social
services advocacy for battered women and their children. Many provide addi-
tional public education and training, and some provide counseling services to
battering men. All of these services are provided at modest cost. Client cost per
day ranges from $15 to $25. The alternative to shelter services are much more
costly. Family violence is a spiral of increasing frequency and severity. If the
violence continues, serious injury or death may result. No price can be put on a
human life, but the cost to society of prosecution of the batterer, and the care
of the now parentless children is immense. Injuries short of death often require
hospitalization which can run several hundred dollars per day. The ëost of plac-
ing a child from the violent home in a public facility cost three to four times the
amount of providing safety for the child and their mother in a shelter. The emo-
-tional and psychological consequences of being physically assaulted by a partner
are profound. The depression and anxiety that are the consequences of battering,
* are often labeled as mental disturbance rather than a situation response to
violent, terrifying relationship. Some women find shelter from batterers in men-
-tal hospitals at a cost of hundreds of dollars per day.
Shelters provide a desperately needed and sometimes life saving service that
:j~ cost effective. Police refer to a shelter, the only available 24 hour crisis housing.
prosecutors refer to shelter, clients who are witnesses in felony cases and need
protection refer to shelter, and social service agencies refer women and children
* to shelter for safety. Mental health centers are sending women to shelters who
are depressed and might otherwise be hospitalized. Emergency wards use shelters
for injured women that require rest and recovery from traumatic injury. Shel-
ters are in trouble. Client load increases with no staff or concomitant increase
in funds. Funding services are often short term and gross-roots fund raising
requires massive commitments on staff and volunteer energies at a time when
clients loads are rapidly increasing. If shelter services are to survive, they must
be identified, as the provider of necessary, often mandated, social services. Pub-
lic agencies that use the shelter must pay for the services rendered. The shelter
can provide services at a very low cost, but they receive adequate compensation
for all the services provided or they will cease to exist. The shelter may close
for lack of funds, but the need for services will not end. In one form or another,
existing public agencies will pick up the service but probably less effectively and
~certainly at a much higher cost to taxpayers.
I have been involved with the issue of family violence for the past four years.
During this time, I have witnessed an explosion of public interest and concern.
Shelters for battered women and their children are opening all over the country,
and as each opens, it is filled and existing shelters in the area, if there are any,
watch in wonder and frustration as their already overtaxed hotlines ring even
more frequently. We are witnessing a phenomenon! Every television show, radio
program and newspaper article on the topic brings another deluge of calls. Three
years ago there was one shelter for battered women in the Los Angeles County
area and it received 100 calls a month. Today there are seven shelters and each
one of them averages up to 300 calls month! All shelters turn away many more
women ancT children than they can accept; as many as 15 clients cannot be
* served for every one finding space a vailable.
It would appear from the statistics that we are in the throes of a problem
-massively increasing in frequency and severity. I do not believe the level of
-violence in families has increased so dramatically during the last three years
as the calls to the Hotline would suggest. I do believe that a problem of long
-standing is finally being recognized. Each new shelter, each net Hotline, each
shred of media coverage is a message to victims of the violent family that there
-is hope. There are alternatives, they need no longer be locked by public ignor-
*ance, unconcern and prejudice into silently bearing a tortured existence of fear
-and victimization. WomenShelter has received calls from battered women who
have been beaten through 10, 15, 25 and even 40 years of marriage. The fact that
there now exists a shelter gives women hope and encourages them to overcome
-the immense feelings of powerlessness, helplessness and dependency that pro-
-longed victimization engenders, and reach out for help, often for the first time.
Shelters provide more than emergency housing and food. Counselhig and sup-
*portive social services give a battered woman a real opportunity to rediscover
herself as a powerful and autonomous human being. As she .can experience her-
self as deserving respect, she regains lost self-esteem and the ability to take care
~of herself. Unfortunately, many of the battered women calling for help in Los
Angeles County cannot find space within a shelter, More shelter space must be
PAGENO="0127"
121
made available. Shelters alone cannot solve the problem of family violence. Pub-
lic agencies dealing with violent families must increase the effectiveness of their
intervention. Laws that protect a woman in her home must be strengthened and
enforced. Education must become part of the responsibility of schools, mental
and public health agencies.
The existence of shelters in the Los Angeles County area has had a signifi-
cant impact upon public agency response to the problem of domestic violence. In
providing advocacy for Hotline callers and shelter residents, shelters have be-
come acutely aware of the often insensitive and ineffective response of public
agencies. The Southern California Coalition for Battered Women, a joint effort
of shelters and other concerned groups, has provided a lobby for the needs of
battered women.
Growing out of the increased concern for the problems of domestic violence,
stimulated by the experience and vocal participation of shelters, the Los Angeles
`County Board of Supervisors formed a Task Force to study the problem on
a country-wide basis. The report of the Task Force is included for the record of
this committee. An important recommendation of the report that has been im-
plemented is the formation of a permanent Los Angeles County Domestic Vio-
lence Council. A description of the council is being submitted for the record. In-
eluded in this report is an attitude and information survey I constructed for
use as part of a training needs assessment of County Agencies with responsibil-
ities for victims and perpetrators of violence. The survey was completed
anonymously by county law enforcement, criminal justice, medical and mental
health professionals. The findings indicated the professionals dealing most di-
rectly with violent families, law enforcement and criminal justice, had the most
misinformation on the topic and held the most negative stereotypes of the bat-
tered woman
An extensive effort has been made, both by individual shelters, the Southern
California Coalition for Battered Women and concerned public agencies to im-
prove information and training of professionals. Both the Los Angeles District
Attorney and the City Attorney of Los Angeles have instituted programs to ad-
dress more effectively the problem of family violence. Information on both of
these programs is included in the record. Of special interest is the program of
the City Attorney, I believe the first prosecutorial agency in the county to in-
troduce a program that, as a matter of policy relieves the woman of the burden
of believing it is she who must "press charges." Under the City Attorney's new
program, the Deputy City Attorney signs the charges and the woman is informed
that she is not responsible for deciding whether the prosecutors case against
her partner will go forward. It is the experience of the City Attorney's office that
most women are co-operative once they no longer feel "to blame" for their
mate's prosecution. Recommendations to the court are that first offenders be
sentenced to probation with counseling mandated and, only if another offense
occurs, will jail time be requested. These procedures have resulted in a 100
percent increase in the rate of conviction during the first year and it is be-
lieved that recidivism is being reduced. Further, the Los Angeles County Police
Department, now assured that their arrests will result in charges and better pros-
pects for conviction, are making more arrests and providing a somewhat better
response to battered women needing assistance. Many more changes need to be
made, but we have a beginning of a more just and effective handling of do-
mestic violence. These changes are the direct result of the information generated
by the shelters on the problems and needs of battered women in the Los Angeles
County area and the advocacy provided by shelters.
The Southern California Coalition for Battered Women, as a representative
voice of all the shelters, has been effective in providing liaison with Public
agencies and government and advocacy for shelters and the battered women
they serve. A one year ACTION grant has enabled the Coalition to hire permanent
staff and expand activities to provide indepth training for shelter staff, volunteers
and interested professionals. Now, requests for training are multiplying and the
grant is ending. It is a concern for all of the shelters and the Los Angeles
County Domestic Violence Council to find ongoing funding for the vital functions
of the Coalition. A one year grant does not provide enough time to establish an
effective program and to find other sources of ongoing funds.
During the last year, I have conducted training seminars for 1500 professionals
on the topic of family violence. I find that professionals dealing with the battered
woman share, with ,the general public, confusion over why a woman tolerates
violence in a relationship, and once out of the situation may return to the violent
PAGENO="0128"
122
partner. Police often find the woman ambivalent or passive, unwilling and Un-
able to decide whether to arrest. Prosecutors have often experienced a womaa
who is anxious to co-operate one day, and refusing to co-operate the next. Mental
health professionals find a woman passive, dependent and manipulative, and.
believe the violence against her may result from her own personality character-
istics. Hospital personnel sometimes find the women reluctant to disclose the
real cause of her injuries. Too often, frustrated in the attempts to help a few-,
the professional hardens herself to the situation of all battered women. Thus,.
insensitive and ineffective response begins. Information on the dynamics of the
violent family and the consequence of battering on the victim can reduce the
frustration of the professional and provide tools for more effective intervention.
The pattern of the violent family has been described by Dr. Lenore Walker'
as a 3-phase cycle, a long period of tension building in a violent battering epi-
sode and a last phase of loving reconciliation. The woman is not motivated to.
seek help during the tension building as she senses the approach of the battering
episode. Unfortunately, most helping agencies are equipped to help only after'
the beating has occurred. But, when the beating is over, the loving reconcilia-.
tion is in progress. The man is apologetic, loving and reassuring. The woman.
whose self esteem has been devastated by the man's attack on her, now finds
he is willing to make reparation, both material and emotional, and she basks in.
his attention and love. Now the system is ready to intervene, arrest the man, and
lend her assistance but she is reluctant to co-operate. Clearly there is a tragic
mismatch between the phase of the cycle and the function of the system. Further,.
the woman has often survived the battering relationship by yielding to the man's
demands for a passive, dependent, submissive mate, isolated from friends and
even family who may inflame her possessive jealousy. Passivity, dependence,
even manipulative behavior become survival tactics within the battering rela-
tionship. If she summons the courage to ask for help, she is often rebuffed. To
convince policy, prosecutors and social service workers she needs help and will
follow through, requires assertive behavior. The bind is an insidious one; sur-
vival tactics within that reduced relationship become counter productive if she
is attempting to get assistance to end her victimization.
Once professionals understand the dynamics of the battering relationship,
they can more effectively aid the battered woman and devise intervention strat-
egies that will be effective in winning her co-operation.
The extent of the problem of domestic violence is well documented. At the~~
White House conference on Domestic Violence, it was estimated that there are
28 million battered women in the United States. An FBI estimate presented at
hearings of the California State Senate for bills SB 91-92 was that 20 percent
of American families are violent. Further, 32 percent of homocides are between
partners. The Statistics of spousal violence are staggering but to consider them
alone is to seriously underestimate the impact of domestic violence on American
life. I believe that violence in the family is the tap-root of the seize of violence in
the streets. Surveys of individuals arrested for violent crimes inevitably reveal
a background of family violence. Child abuse, abuse of the elderly, violent at-
tacks on strangers and acquaintances are all patterns that begin in a violent
home. The violence between adult partners devastates the children. At Women-
Shelter we have observed over 400 children from violent homes: 30 percent of
these children victims themselves of the violence, but the remaining 70 percent
also victims. The majority of all the children were developmentally behind their
age level and demonstrated a wide variety of emotional and physical problems;
ineurists, nightmares, hyperactivity, hyperaggressiveness, extensive fearfulness,
shyness, anxiety and learning handicaps have all been observed.
The consequences of the violent family on long-term socialization of the child
is no longer in doubt; empirical studies demonstrate an extraordinarily high
correlation between childhood experience and adult violent and/or victimization.
WomenShelter clients report that 90 percent of their battering partners grew
up in battering homes.
In a very real sense, money spent to alleviate the problem of domestic violence -
will pay its real dividends in the long-term effects on the children. In a real
sense, the shelters can serve a vital role in prevention of violence. We, as a
nation, have spent immense sums of money to prevent crime and rehabilitate the
criminal, but recidivism is so high that much of our money is wasted. I believe -
that if we can reduce the violence that individuals suffer and observe in child-
hood, we can begin to reduce the staggering level of violence in our society.
PAGENO="0129"
123
I urge the passage of these bills to fund desperately needed shelters and to im-
prove training of responsible public agencies, and to further the education of the
public on the issue of violence, beginning in the home and spreading destruc-
tively into every aspect of our life as a nation.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
I. Residential shelters for battered women and their children must be avail-
uble as part of any comprehensive program to address the problem of family
violence.
2. Shelters as non-profit, grass-roots entities provide cost-effective services to
battered women and their children, and should be the choice over much more
costly provision of such services by public agencies.
3. Shelters have become the experts on family violence, providing effective serv-
ices to interrupt spousal violence. This expertise should be recognized and utilized'
by public agencies.
4. Shelters can train law enforcement, criminal justice, social services,
mental health and health professionals to more effectively intervene with the
violent family. Private and public agencies have training budgets and shelters
`should be paid as expert consultants in family violence for the training they
provide.
5. Shelters must he funded in a stable, ongoing manner as a needed social'
service. Some method must be found for the continuation of the vital services and
expertise of the shelter beyond time-limited funding of demonstration grants and'
ether similar funding sources. To the extent public agencies refer to shelter,
clients for protective and social services that are the agencies' responsibility, the
shelter should be reimbursed from the public agency budget. This will insure
the continuation of the needed services in the most cost-effective manner.
6. Prevention of violence requires long-term public education. Shelters can be
central to the educational effort of a community by providing information on'
the causes. consequences and alternatives to the violence.
Respectfully submitted.
GERALDINE BUTTS STAHLY,
Executive Director.
PREPARED STATEMENT OF JANICE MOORE, M~ SISTER'S PLACE, WOMEN'S LEGAL
DEFENSE FUND, WASHINGTON, D.C.
I am pleased to have this opportunity to testify before you today on this issue
of vital concern. My name is Janice Moore. I am on the staff of My Sister's
Place. a shelter for battered women and their children. The shelter, located in
Washington, D.C., is a project of the Women's Legal Defense Fund. The pur-
poses, philosophy, and operation of our shelter are consistent with those of many
other shelters across the country.
As you have heard in previous testimony, a battered woman who has been
forced to flee her home has many, needs. One of her most immediate needs is to
find refuge in a place which can provide a safe and supportive environment. Since
friends and family are often unavailable, unwilling, or unable to house or help
her, emergency shelters for battered women are essential.
To give you a typical example, a woman comes to the shelter without money
or other resources. She has left her husband or boyfriend on whom she was
either partially or wholly financially dependent. She will probably have her
children with her. She or her children may require immediate medical attention.
`Usually she needs legal advice. She may require job referrals or training, and
sometimes needs public assistance to support herself and her children until she
can find such employment. If she has children, she may have to either place
the children in day care or in school. If she decides not to return to her spouse,
she will need help finding new housing.
Not only does a battered woman have these concrete needs which must be
met, but having been both physically and psychologically abused she has little
confidence in her abilities or her self worth. Out of fear, embarrassment, and
guilt, a woman typically becomes isolated from the world around her. One of
the results of this isolation may be that she does not have a clear understanding
of what services are available to her. The prospect of beginning a new life on
her own can he fraught with fear and anxiety. For these reasons, most battered
women need support and assistance in achieving their goals.
PAGENO="0130"
124
Recognizing the complexity of her needs, shelters attempt to provide compre-
hensive services in a supportive environment. These services may include legal
and psychological counseling, employment and housing assistance, welfare ad-
Vocacy, medical aid, and children's programs. The staff in shelters help a woman
identify her needs, direct her to appropriate resources and act as an advocate
when she has difficulty obtaining needed services. Since the delivery of services
by some social service agencies is fragmented and confusing, and their staff
may be uninformed, if not uncooperative, advocacy is an important component
of service delivery to battered women.
The children of battered women also require special attention. These chil-
dren have often witnessed their mothers being beaten-some have been victims
of abuse themselves. Many are hostile and aggressive, some shy and withdrawn.
The problems these children bring with them to the shelter may be intensified
by the demands of adjusting to a new environment. To try to make the chil-
dren's transition from their home to the shelter as smooth as possible, it is
necessary to have a program geared specifically toward meeting these children's
special needs. In addition to offering them recreational and educational activities,
shelter staff and volunteers can offer the children emotional support that their
mothers, who are themselves in a crisis situation, may be unable to provide
or need assistance in providing.
The philosophy and approach of service organizations are often as im-
portant as the actual services provided. Traditionally, community based shelters.
have incorporated the concepts of self-help and peer support into their programs.
These principles provide the foundation for strengthening a battered woman's
self-concept and enabling her to regain control over her own life. In general,
shelters provide an environment in which supportive women take care of them-
selves and each other, learn to make and trust their own decisions, rediscover
their abilities, and develop a stronger sense of their own worth.
Community based shelters have been started in a variety of ways, but the
vast majority sprang from other more general service organizations such as
women's centers, hotlines, or legal advocacy programs. Women in such organiza-
tions received thousands of calls for help from desperate women with no place
to go to escape a violent home. It was in direct response to these pleas for help
that the majority of grass roots shelters have been started.
Since it usually costs a substantial amount of money to operate a shelter,
many were started in the homes of volunteers or by scraping together just enough
money to rent an apartment. Over the years, many shelters which were started
in this way have been able to raise the funds necessary to rent a 4 or 5 bedroom
house and, usually with a heavy reliance on volunteers and in-kind contributions
of food, furniture, linens, etc., have been able to keep their doors open. How-
ever, many of these shelters face the prospect of having to either close entirely
or drastically cut back on services and coverage because start-up funds are
usually only available for the first 2 years of operation, while it takes most orga-
nizations close to 5 years to become self-sufficient. Other shelters are still
struggling to open or to move out of individual's houses because the seed money
that is available is extremely limited. This is especially true in areas of the
country which have not yet recognized domestic violence as an issue demanding
public action.
Currently, the need for shelters far outweighs the number in operation. Shel-
ters across the country routinely turn away at least 3 to 4 times as many
families as they are able to serve. In fact, a study conducted in England con-
eluded that there should be one shelter for every 10,000 families.
Our experience with raising money for My Sister's Place and with the efforts
of other similar shelters is that even the most diligent and creative fundraising
efforts are often not enough to ensure the opening or continuance of commu-
nity-based shelters. As I mentioned before, "start-up" or seed money grants
(usually from local private foundations) are difficult to obtain and are almost
always limited to 1 or 2 years. National foundations are swamped with requests
from shelters, and the vast majority will only consider requests from organiza-
tions which propose to address the problem on a nation-wide basis.
Another frequently used source of funding for shelters is found in local public
agencies such as CETA, WIN, and the local Department of Human Resources.
The manpower programs have been the mainstay of many community-based
shelters. These programs, however, are now under fire from Congress and the
Executive Branch. If the proposed cuts (especially to CETA) are passed, shelters
and many other worthy iion-profit agencies will suffer serious financial hardship.
PAGENO="0131"
125
Other sources of revenue include block grant funds and direct federal grant
programs such as ACTION and LEAA. Block grant funds seem to be accessible
in some areas (Minnesota is a good example) and very difficult to acquire in
others (the District of Columbia being an example). The vagaries of the block.
grant process make them useful but extremely unreliable sources of funds.
Direct Federal grant programs are similar in that they may provide important'
revenue to a few shelters, but in general, access to these funds is extremely
limited. Often the grants are for research and demonstration projects requiring:
sophisticated research skills. Even when this is not a requirement, the level of
grantsmanship skills necessary to compete successfully with professional "think
tanks" is high and usually beyond the reach of local grass roots organizations.
Title XX money, funneled from HEW through state and local governments,
is equally unreliable. In many parts of the country it is virtually impossible
to impact `on the expenditure of these block grant funds. In the District of'
Columbia for instance, almost all of the money is used to fund government-run
agencies. For years, local non-profit organizations have tried unsuccessfully to
ensure that a greater proportion of these funds are made available to non-gov-~
ernmental agencies. Year after year of testimony and effort have yielded almost'
no result. In our city, as in many throughout the country, Title XX money is~
not accessible to programs for battered women.
The unpredictability of funding also creates other problems. Even where seed'
money is available to start a shelter, after the first few years of operation,
the very existence of the shelter may be jeopardized. Long-term planning and.
program development is also impeded by funding constraints. For these reasons
we would like to recommend that HR. 2977 be amended from a 3-year to a 5-
year program in order to allow more flexibility in funding so that, where appro-
priate, programs may receive funds for up to 5 years.
The shelter movement here and in other parts of the world have been charac--
terized by its roots in the community. The success of shelters has in large part
been due to their independence. Not only does a community based shelter relieve
the government of one more administrative burden, but it provides services
in an efficient and effective manner. Further, such shelters offer comprehensive
services with certain philosophical ideals like those of self-help and peer sup~
port underlying all efforts to provide for a woman's psychological and material
well being. It is these community based shelters which first responded to the'
needs of battered women and developed an expertise in approaching the prob-
lem and which can be relied upon to seek creative and practical solutions in the
future.
For all of these reasons, assistance from the federal government in the form'
proposed in HR. 2977 is essential to the continued survival of `shelters for bat-
tered women and to the creation of the many more that are so desperately
needed. On behalf of My Sister's Place and the hundreds of other shelters and
support programs for battered women, I wholeheartedly support H.R. 297T'
and urge you to work strenuously for its passage.
PREPARED STATEMENT OF GINGER MCMAIION, ADMINISTRATIVE DIRECTOR OF A~
Do~fEsTIo VIOLENCE PROJECT
Good Day: My name is Ginger McMahon. I am from Delaware County, Penna.
Currently, I am serving as Administrative Director of a domestic violence proj-
ect in my home county.
I am pleased to have the opportunity to offer my testimony to this committee;,
my testimony is drawn from my personal experience as a victim of domestic
violence. I intend to share with you some of the trauma my children and I ex-
perienced as victims of domestic violence, and hopefully, to suggest ways of
implementing some of the needs which are critical for adults and children who
experience abuse.
My experience is neither isolated nor unique; it is happening as a daily occur-~
rence to thousands of families in the United States.
A-s a starting point, let me dispel a popular myth about `domestic violence:
domestic violence is not dictated `by race, economic or social stature, education, or
any of the common indicators of community standing. We were a comfortably'
established family living in a 12 room farm house on 20 acres. We owned our own
business, we were able to afford vacations, new cars, recreational vehicles. We~
were respected members of our community, a small town conveniently close to a
large city. My husband was active in scouting and served as a Little League coach,
PAGENO="0132"
126
In addition, he was a member of the local school board. I was a member of the
Junior League and the League of Women Voters. I was appointed to the Mayor's
Council on Drug and Alcohol and the Mayor's Commission on Delinquency, in
addition to working as a volunteer in the Juvenile Probation Office. We were 12
in our family, my husband and myself, our two natural sons and one daughter,
adopted as an infant, and seven adopted teenagers.
My husband is a college graduate; my education was interrupted by marriage.
I found him brilliant, caring, gentle; we shared a strong love for children. I
thought of him as a Pied Piper. One day the Pied Piper turned into Dr. Jeckyl
and Mr. Hyde. We still do not know what happened. He began to drink more
frequently. His attitude towards me became critical and dissatisfied. Within a
year be bad begun slapping me whenever I disagreed with him, and whenever
anything I did did not meet with his approvaL This included everything from
my political opinions to what I prepared for meals. He would shove me, shake
me, curse me for not agreeing with his views on business, religion, our children.
If it rained, he held me responsible * * whatever displeased him or thwarted
his plans he blamed on me. I had changed from a bright, loving, competent person
to a sullen, hysterical, unattractive and irresponsible one according to him. He
began telling me that I was crazy and needed help. I discussed what was hap-
pening with our family physician who suggested that my husband was frus-
trated and had other things on his mind that were troubling him. My doctor gave
me pills which be said would help me to cope with the situation. He also sug-
gested that I speak to our minister. The minister's opinion was that it was my
duty as a wife and mother to be patient and tolerant * * * in short that I should
accept the abuse and keep my mouth shut. Needless to say, neither the doctor
nor the minister was in any way helpful.
My husband's hostility and violence were increasing, and I was becoming
more afraid to be alone with him. His hostility and rage were not directed toward
anyone else, not friends, business associates or our children.
His rage increased and he began to punch me. I remember the first night
that happened * * * he punched me and I forced myself to stay quiet so that
the children would not be made aware of what bad happened. The following
day, I was in pain and had difficulty moving about. He asked me what was
wrong, and when I told him that I was in pain as a result of his punching me
he told me I was crazy and that I must have fallen. The beatings became more
*severe; on one occasion, he hit my face and cut me so that I needed stitches. He
accompanied me to the doctor's office and he and the doctor concluded that I
was becoming accident prone. After this incident, he apologized and told me
that it would never happen again. For a while, things improved. He became
more attentive, bought me presents, took me on trips. Because I wanted to
believe that things would change, I took this brief respite as an indication
that they were changing. However, the abuse began again, to be followed by
his remorse and promises for change. This constant pattern of violence and re-
morse began to alter my behavior and thinking. I became afraid for my life.
It became impossible to plan any activities because I never knew when my
next "accident" would occur that might leave me visibly injured or even con-
fined to bed. It was during this period that I began to lose my identity as a
person. I began to believe that there must be something wrong with me *
that I deserved the abuse, that I was crazy. I became totally isolated with my
fear and humiliation. There was no one to whom I could turn * * no one to
talk to.
As a desperate remedy, I suggested marriage counseling to my husband.
He became very angry, and spent 5 hours telling me that I didn't deserve to live,
and choked me until I nearly lost consciousness. During that five hours, he
"explained" to me bow unappreciative I was * 0 0 that all my friends were
probably beaten by their husbands as well * * 0 that it was natural for men
to beat their wives, where else might a man release his frustrations? As a result
of this incident, my voice box was damaged, and the doctor said that the in-
jury might be permanent. My husband had taunted me by telling me to try to
get a divorce. He told me that if I tried, he would see to it that I lost the chil-
dren. With no one to turn to, I knew I was trapped. I went to friends, and
the reactions were what I have since learned is predictable. They didn't be-
lieve me, didn't want to get involved, suggested psychiatrists * * * and my
life was becoming increasingly intolerable.
PAGENO="0133"
127
I knew that I had to get out. One of the resources I found was the Women's
Counseling Center at 15. Mass. It was about this tIme that our 4 oldest children
still at home came to me and told me that they knew about the abuse. The chil-
dren and I went to the counseling center where we discussed what was happen-
ing. The psychologist at the center was able to determine that all of the kids,
even the youngest, were aware of the abuse and were suffering emotionally
from it. I consulted with my oldest children, recalling them from college so
that we could all share in the decision I was about to make.
Deciding to leave was easy * * * implementing the decision was not. All
that we had, with the exception of one of the cars and the mortgage on the
house was in my husband's name. Because of the amount of children I bad, it
was impossible to find a place to live. My family turned against me * ~ * they
could not understand how I could think of leaving; I should stay and cope, try
to make my marriage work. It was months before we were able to leave, and
all during that time, the violence continued. During that time, the children and
I drew closer together C * one night, my husband's abuse became so had that
the kids called the police. Because of the way the laws are written, the police
could do nothing unless my husband hit me outside of the house. Then, they
could arrest him for disorderly conduct or disturbing the peace.
The children confronted my husband with their knowledge of his abuse. He
was very angry that they had become aware of what was happening. He decided
to leave, but told us that he would never provide any support. He made good
that threat * * * he destroyed the business. The property had to be sold to
pay off the debts he incurred. The little that he left us we used to relocate.
After we left, I found a job and the older children went to college. My husband
returned periodically to harass me, often coming to my job. Two of my colleagues
sn~gested that I seek employment elsewhere as a result of his harassment.
In the next three years. much of our time was spent in custody battles, support
hearings, property settlements. I feel that a large part of that time was lost to
the children and me as a result of the endless litigation in which we were
involved.
Despite all the time we spent in litigation we received no support. Although
he was clever enough to maneuver legally to the point where he never even
paid child support, I somehow feel that we have won something. We are together
as a family. I am angry, I am bitter, I am disillusioned. The law provided no
protection. no support, no redress for our suffering.
My husband was never brought to account for the abuse, for the lack of
child support, for the lives he interrupted.
Had there been a shelter facility available, we would have been able to leave
much sooner * * * we would have been spared at least those last agoni~iug
months of fear and helplessness. Had there been equitable laws covering dom~~tie
violence, we would have had at least some financial support. I am grateful that
I was able to find work, to relocate, to have the support of my childrrrn. But
what of the women who cannot relocate, who have no job skills, whose children
are unaware or too young, or who are bought off 1w theIr fathers?
I am the administrative director of the Marital Abuse Proiect, which has
been in operation for three and a half years. We provide hot line and options
counselling, court and hospital accompaniment. court advocacy, police training,
and a variety of other services. We have several funding resources including
LEAA, private foundations, and local money. We have also tried. pnsuccessfully,
to obtain Title XX money. In spite of all of this we have not been abl~ to
fund our shelter in Delaware County. We own a nine-bedroom house. which
we could use for a shelter. but we haven't been able to get funds for the
actual operation of the shelter. We need .$S~.OOO to operate for a year.
Our experience, and that of most grouns throughout the country, is that
operating funds are the most difficult to obtain, yet crucial if w~ are to begin
to meet the ~m~r~encv needs of victims of domestic violence. HR 2977 would
provide that essential funding.
As a former victim of domestic violence, as an individual working with abused
wom~n. I cannot urge too stronaly the need for more and better shelter facilities
nud for stronger and more effective laws protecting the rights of women and
children.
PAGENO="0134"
128
PANEL PRESENTATION__GERALDINE STAHLY, WOMENSHELTER,
LONG BEACH, CALIF.; JANICE MOORE, MY SISTER'S PLACE,
WASHINGTON, D.C.; GINGER MeMAHON, MARITAL ABUSE PROJ-
ECT, DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNA.; CYNTHIA DAMES, BATTERED
WOMEN'S PROJECT, SANTA FE, N. MEX.
Ms. STAIILY. I am Geraldine Stahly, the executive director of
WomenShelter in Long Beach, Calif.
Ms. Mooiin. I am Janice Moore. I am from My Sister's Place in
Washington, D.C.
Ms. MOMAHON. I am Ginger McMahon from Delaware County, Pa.
II am a victim and a director of a program.
Ms. DAMES. I am Cynthia Dames from Santa Fe, N. Mex. I am also
the chairperson of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence.
Mr. MILLER. Geraldine, do you want to start?
STATEMENT OP GERALDINE STAHLY, WOMENSHELTER, LONG
BEACH, CALIF.
Ms. STAHLY. I really have a dual focus, and I would like to take that
up in the summarization of the written testimony I have presented to
~you.
As executive director of a shelter, I have been most concerned with
providing direct crisis intervention services to women and children in
desperate situations. But also as an associate in psychology at the
University of California, working on a dissertation on the topic, I have
become very involved as well as a social psychologist in looking at the
problem of violence in the family, its causes, its whole perspective, and
trying to come up in our shelter, and in other shelters, with a perspec-
tive on intervention and a perspective on prevention.
We have been doing a lot of training and working a lot with pro-
fessionals in law enforcement, in criminal justice, in mental health,
and 111 health services to help them become more effective with the vio-
lent families with which they are dealing. I think the dimensions of
the problem are very clear to the committee.
Twenty-eight million battered women was an estimate that caine
from the White House conference. I think that that, based on our ex-
perience at WomenShelter, probably entails 50 million or more chil-
dren growing up in these violent families. I think those figures are
~almost too enormous to digest.
We opened in 1977 in September. In 22 months of operation we have
had 600 women and children who have been sheltered. We have had
~more than 3,000 hotline calls. When we first opened 22 months ago, we
had 100 hotline calls a month, and we had to reject about five women
.and children for every one we could accept.
Now currently in the last few months, we have had as many as
200 and 300 calls in a month and find that we are rejecting 15 women
~and children for every one that we can accept. And our experience is
~rnirrored in all of Los Angeles County. Three years ago in Los Angeles
PAGENO="0135"
129
County there was one shelter that was functioning, and it was receiving
about 100 calls a month. Now we have seven shelters, and each of these
shelters is receiving 200 and 300 calls.
Of course, women will call more than one shelter, and still it is very
clear that the existence of shelters within Los Angeles County has
brought to the attention an enormous problem that was only suspected
when shelters first began opening their doors. Many other communities
have mirrored our experience. When help becomes available, massive
numbers of women will reach out for that help.
Calls come to us at WomenShelter from women who have suffered
violence in marriage for sometimes as long as 40 years, and often
these women of marriages of long standing have long ago given up
hoping or reaching up for help because they have been so often re-
buffed in their early attempts to get help in years before.
Now that a shelter exists, now that there is beginning to be public
attention to the issue, they again reach out for help. That, I think, is
part of where this massive number of calls is coming from.
I think one of the important things in support of the legislation
you are considering is the impact that shelters have on public agency
response. In providing advocacy for women, they bring to the atten-
tion of the public and the public agencies the tremendous deficiencies
that exist in the way agencies currently, in the past and continuing
currently, handle the problem.
Police are reluctant to arrest. I understand there are still police
forces which have informal stitch rules, where a woman who requires
fewer than sometimes as many as 20 stitches will not be a woman whose
husband will be arrested, or whose partner will be arrested. District
attorneys continue to be reluctant to prosecute. In some areas, even
in southern California, district attorneys have waiting rules where
women who come in to press charges will be sent away and told to
come back days later. So it is no wonder women become discouraged
in trying to exercise their rights as a human being to be protected by
the law.
Social service agencies in some areas are also very poorly geared in
their regulations and in their procedures to help an adult woman get
out of a dangerous relationship. In some areas, a woman is in a real
catch-22 where she needs to establish an address away from her hus-
band in order to get aid, and yet, without aid, she cannot establish
an address unless a shelter exists in that community.
I think it is necessary also to consider the fact that the battered
woman has been a difficult client for public agencies, the experience of
police who have found women ambivalent and indecisive about whether
an arrest should be made. Although that really isn't a decision a woman
should be asked to make, nevertheless the police experience her as
ambivalent, and that discourages them.
District attorneys do find that women, for some of the reasons that
have already been mentioned in testimony, and it is a fact, often change
their minds and become reluctant to testify, sometimes because of
threats, but sometimes because of reconciliation of one form or another.
I think, in order to deal with the problem, we need to understand
something about the dynamics of this relationship which causes the
woman to be a difficult client for public agencies as they are now formu-
PAGENO="0136"
130
lated in their policies. All victims of violent assaults offer, in addition
to physical injuries, emotional psychological injury and damage. A
woman who is battered by her husband or her spouse or the man that
she loves and has come to depend on for protection-it is a reversal that
exacerbates the emotional and psychological damage of the attack.
Among the consequences of battering that we observe in the women
at WomenShelter-and all the other shelters have similar experi-
ences-is the low esteem and passivity and feelings of powerlessness
which lead to great dependency and confusion.
I think it is important to realize that the passivity and the depend-
ence of the women we see often is not a longstanding psychological
characteristic of the woman, but rather can be viewed as her response
to the battering situation. The battering man is often jealous and
possessive and extremely controlling, and she may find that his violence
is actually reduced by passive and dependent responses to him.
Now, this same woman, when she may want to leave the situation
and get help, finds that the police and the prosecutor want to be helping
only a victim who can be assertive and decisive and assures them that
she will follow through. So we are asking this woman to do something
rather extraordinary, to change almost instantly a set of behaviors
that have been survival behaviors in the battering situation, to now
stick up for herself, be decisive, be assertive in order to get help from
the system.
I think it is unrealistic, and I think it is part of the reason that the
system has not dealt at all effectively with the battered woman and
has found her to be uncooperative. They have not given her the support
that she needs in order to cooperate.
It is our finding in working with people in public agencies in Los
Angeles that it ran be extremely helpful to communicate to the public
agencies something about the dynamics of this violent situation, to help
them to gear both their policy and their individual responses of the
Tine personnel to what is the real situation of the battered woman and
her needs.
There is beginnine to be a lot of literature and information on this.
I think Dr. Lenore Walker ha.s brilliantly described the dynamics of
the battered relationship, where there are at least three distinct phases.
There is a tension building phase during which the woman senses that
the battering is coming. There is an acute episode. Then there is a
loving reconciliation following.
During the loving reconciliation, the woman often gets the only
positive things that exist in her life. Cut off, often, in this battering
relationship by a jealous and possessive man, She ha.s no other source
of self-esteem or positive feedback. Now, following a. battering, she
receives love and attention and assurance that she is OK as a woman.
After all, in our society, many, many women are socialized to feel
that their primary role is to make a man happy. and failing to do that,
the ultimate failure is to be a battered woman. So she feels devastated,
often, as a human being.
When he comes to her with his apologies and his gifts and his love,
it is not surprising that she accepts them.
Now, look at the way the system interacts with the dynamics of the
battering relationship. When the woman is in that tension-building
PAGENO="0137"
131
phase, when she senses the battering is coming, she often comes to the
shelter. We have begun to say at WornenShelter that a woman comes
as often before the next beating as after the last one. It is during that
tension-building phase that she is most motivated to leave and to reach
out for help.
But when she reaches out for help to a public age.ncy, she is re-
buffed. She is told by the police they can't arrest him for what she
thinks her husband may do to her when he gets home. The district
attorney is often unwilling to prosecute for the minor injuries that
sometimes occur during that tension-building phase, particularly when
the same woman may have been reluctant to proceed at another date
after a more severe battering.
I think it is extraordinarily important to understand that this
mismatch is part of the problem of public agencies in being responsive.
If we can begin to understand something about the dynamics of the
family, I think we can create intervention that will be effective.
Shelters are impacting public agencies, in part by the advocates for
the battered women and explaining to the agencies something of the
dynamics that we are beginning to observe in these violent relation-
ships. I think that a fine example of this is what has happened in Los
Angeles County since the existence of shelters during the period of the
last 3 years, when there have been a number of shelters.
In Los Angeles we are very fortunate. Haven House is a shelter
that has been in operation now for 7 years, and is one of the oldest in
the country. They are an example and were extremely helpful to other
shelters that developed, so now there are a number of shelters in the
Los Angeles area giving support to battered women, but also impact-
ing public agencies.
The shelters together formed a coalition of shelters and other inter-
ested people, called the Southern California Coalition for Battered
Women. This coalition, along with individual shelters, have had a tre-
mendous impact on public agency response in the Los Angeles County
area. I think, as a direct result of the shelters' existence and their work
with battered women, the board of supervisors in Los Angeles County
formed a task force on domestic violence, which created a report that
was the result of a joint effort between grassroots people working in
shelters with battered women and public agencies charged with the
responsibility.
I have that report, which I would like to enter into the record. I
think that it is evidence of what can come out of the existence of
shelters in a community, in terms of influencing some changes at the
level of government and at the level of public agency response.
Coming out of the work of the task force, there was an establishment
of new programs, both by the district attorney and the city attorney
in Los Angeles, and I have information on these also that I would like
to enter into the record. You will find in the description of the city
attorney's program specific acknowledgement to the role of the she]-
ters and the people working with battered women to the creation of
the new program.
It is a very unusual program. I think it is innovative. I don't know
of any other prosecuting agency in the country that has quite their
approach, and it comes from an understanding of the dynamics of
PAGENO="0138"
132
family violence. The city attorney is no longer asking women to file
charges. They are communicating to the woman that it is not her re-
sponsibility to file charges, but it is the responsibility of the prosecutor
as the representative of the State.
What they are finding is, when the woman is thus relieved of this
terrifying and frightening and guilt-producing responsibility to de-
cide if prosecution against her husband will go forward, that women
are much more cooperative.
In the course of the last year with this program, the experience
of the city attorney is that their convictions on battering, domestic
violence cases has gone from 20 percent to 40 percent, a 100-percent
improvement. I think it is a particularly positive program because the
whole thrust of prosecution is to get the man into probation if it is a
first offense, and if it is not a very serious offense causing extreme
injury, into a mandatory counseling program. Then he is made to un-
derstand that a condition of his probation is that there be no further
violence and that he participate in the program.
The attorney's office feels this is reducing recidivism, and they hope
to have statistics soon to establish that.
Ms. MIKuI~sKI. Ms. Stahly, can I ask you how long your testimony
is going to be? I am going to have to leave. I apologize because I have
been looking forward to this part of the program more than to some
of the earlier ones.
Ms. STAHLY. Just let me conclude very quickly by saying that I did
want to say that the role of shelters in increasing public agency re-
sponse and providing this necessary service is recognized in Los
Angeles County, and yet shelters are still in trouble. They are~ under-
staffed, underfunded, and overwhelmed by clients, and they still have
problems with agencies needing to implement on a line level changes
that are happening at an administrative level to really change.
I want to say that the shelters are very cost effective. And as both
the community and the public agencies have come to trust the shelter,.
they send more and more clients our way and we find ourselves, as you
will find in our written testimony, providing services that are i~eally
the mandated services of those agencies. We are not reimbursed for
those services and we cannot indefinitely survive unless we are essen-
tially reimbursed for the mandated services to some extent that we
provide for agencies.
And then the last comment that I want to make is that at the shel-
ter we have been particularly struck by the consequences of: violèncC
for children. All of the children we see, nearly all of the children. hCve
some sort of immediate problems directly resulting from being in a
violent family. I think the long-term consequences of socialization is
that we have a violent society.
I think the violence within the family is the taproot of the violence
in our larger society. Until we can effectively intervene in the vio-
lence happening in the family, we will not be able to reduce the level.
of violence in the street and the level of violence occurring between
strangers.
Thank you.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you.
Janice Moore?
PAGENO="0139"
133
STATEMENT OF JANICE MOORE, STAFF MEMBER, MY SISTER'S~
PLACE, WASHINGTON, D.C., WOMEN'S LEGAL DEFENSE FUND
Ms. MOORE. Good afternoon. My name is Janice Moore.
Before beginning my testimony, I would like to say that I fully
support the testimony of Ms. Stahly. On behalf of My Sister's Place
and the Women's Legal Defense Fund, we would like to pledge our'
support of H.R. 2977 and urge its early passage.
I am on the staff of My Sister's Place, a shelter for battered women
and their children, located in Washington, D.C. My Sister's Place is
a project of the Women's Legal Defense Fund. The purposes, philoso-
phy, and operation of our shelter is consistent with those of many other
shelters across the country.
As you have heard in previous testimony, a battered woman who has
been forced to flee her home has many needs. One of her most immedi-
ate needs is to find refuge in a place which can provide a safe and
supportive environment. Since friends and family are often unavail-
able, unwilling, or unable to house or help her, emergency shelters'
for battered women are essential.
To give you a typical example, a woman comes to the shelter without
money or other resources. She has left her husband or boyfriend on
whom she was either partially or wholly financially dependent. She
will probably have her children with her. She or her children may
require immediate medical attention. Usually she needs legal advice.
She may require job referrals or training, and she sometimes needs
public assistance to support herself an'd her children until she can find
such employment. If she has children, she may have to either place
the children in day care or in school. If she d'ecides not to return to her
spouse, she will need help finding new housing.
Not only does a battered woman have these concrete needs which
must be met, but having been both physically and psychologically
abused, she has little confidence in her abilities or her self-worth. Out
of fear, embarrassment, and guilt, a woman typically becomes isolated
from the world around her.
One of the results of this isolation may be that she does not have a
clear understanding of what services are available to her. The pros-~
pect `of beginning a new `life on her own can be fraught with fear and
anxiety. For all these reasons, most battered women need support and
assistance in achieving their goals.
Recognizing the complexity of her needs, shelters attempt to provide
comprehensive services in a supportive environment. These services
may include legal and psychological counseling, employment and hous-
ing assistance, welfare advocacy, medical aid, and children's programs.
The staff in shelters help a woman identify her needs, direct her to
anpropria~e resources, `and act as an advocate when she has difficulty
obtaining those services. Since the delivery of services by some social
service agencies, including hospital emergency, is fragmented and `con-
fusing, and their staff may be uninformed, if not uncooperative, ad-
vocacy is an important component of service delivery to battered
women.
At this point I would like to make a comment about the testimony'
of the doctor from George Washington University. He s'aid that they
PAGENO="0140"
134
don't see very many battered women coming to the hospital. With our
experience, we don't find that to be true. What we do find to be true
is women who go to hospitals tend not to identify themselves as
battered women unless they are asked, and even when asked, if the
batterer is there or if other people are present, she is apt to deny that.
So I think it is more a matter of their not being identified as battered
women rather than their not coming to the hospital.
I think some of that can be alleviated by training and sensitizing
the staffs at these agencies and hospitals to the problems of battered
women. Also, I don't believe it is true that women who go to hospitals
can always be placed in shelters when they need it. We have had hos-
pitals call and say they have a woman who needs shelter, and we have
not been able to meet that need. We have called around to all the other
shelters we know of and they have been full, too. So she is left with
nowhere to go.
The children of battered women also require special attention. These
children have often witnessed their mothers being beaten. Some have
been victims of abuse themselves. Many are hostile and aggressive,
some shy and withdrawn. The problems these children bring with them
to the shelter may be intensified by the demands of adjusting to a new
environment.
To try to make the children's transition from their home to the
shelter as smooth as possible, it is necessary to have a program geared
specifically toward meeting these children's special needs. In addition
to offering them recreational and educational activities, shelter staff
and volunteers can offer the children emotional support that their
mothers, who are themselves in a crisis situation, may be unable to pro-
vide or who may need assistance in providing.
The philosophy and approach of service organizations are often as
important as the actual services provided. Traditionally, community-
based shelters have incorporated the concepts of self-help and peer
support into their programs. These principles provide the foundation
for strengthening a battered woman's self-concept and enabling her to
regain control over her own life. In general, shelters provide an envi-
ronment in which supportive women take care of themselves and each
other, learn to make and trust their own decisions, rediscover their
abilities, and develop a stronger sense of their own worth.
Community-based shelters have been started in a variety of ways,
but the vast majority sprang from other, more general service organi-
zations such as women's centers, hotlines, or legal advocacy programs.
Women in such organizations received thousands of calls for help
from desperate women with no place to go to escape a violent home.
It was in direct response to these pleas for help that the majority of
grassroots shelters have been started.
Since it usually costs a substantial amount of money to operate a
shelter, many were started in the homes of volunteers or by scraping
together just enough money to rent an apartment. Over the years,
many shelters which were started in this way have been able to raise
the funds necessary to rent a four- or five-bedroom house and, usually
with a heavy reliance on volunteers and in-kind contributions of food,
furniture, linens, et cetera, have been able to keep their doors open.
However, many of these shelters face the prospect of having to either
close entirely or drastically cut back on services and coverage because
PAGENO="0141"
135
startup funds are usually only available for the ifist 2 years of opera-
tion, while in many organizations, more than that time is needed. They
may take 3, 4, or 5 years in order to become self-sufficient.
Other shelters are still struggling to open or to move out of indi-
viduals' houses because the seed money that is available is extremely
limited. This is especially true in areas of the country which have not
yet recognized domestic violence as an issue demanding public action.
As has been said before, the need for shelters far outweighs the
number in operation. Our experience with raising money for My Sis-
te.r's Place and of the efforts of other similar shelters is that even the
most diligent and creative fundraising efforts are often not enough to
insure the opening or continuance of con'imunity-based shelters.
As I n'ientioned before, startup or seed money grants, usually from
local private foundations, are difficult to obtain and are almost always
limited to 1 or 2 years. National foundations are swamped with re-
quests from shelters, and the vast majority will only consider requests
from organizations which propose to address the problem on a nation-
wide basis.
Another frequently used source of funding for shelters is found in
local public agencies such as CETA, WIN, and the local department
of human resources. The manpower programs have been the. mainstay
of many community-based shelters. `These programs, however, are
now under fire from Congress and the executive branch. If the. pro-
posed cuts, especially to CETA, are passed, shelters and many other
worthy nonprofit agencies will suffer serious financial hardship.
Other sources of revenue include bloc grant funds and direct Fed-
eral grant programs, such as ACTION and LEAA. Bloc grant funds
seem to be accessible in some areas-Minnesota is a good example-
and very difficult to acquire in others-the District of Columbia being
an example. The vagaries of the bloc grant process make them useful
but extremely unreliable sources of funds.
Direct Federal grant programs are similar in that they may provide
important revenue to a few shelters, but in general, access to these
funds is extremely limited. Ofte.n the grants are for research and
demonstration proj ects requiring sophisticated research skills. Even
when this is not a requirement. the level of grant.smanship skills neces-
sary to compete successfully with professional think-tanks is high aildi
usually beyond the reach of local grassroots organizations.
Title XX money, funneled from HEW through State and local
governments, is equally unreliable. In many parts of the countr it is
virtually impossible to impact on the expenditure of these bloc, grant
funds. In the District of Columbia, for inst.ance, almost. all of. the
money is used to fund government-run agencies, and very little, if any,
gets into nonprofit organizations.
For years, local nonp.rofit organizations have tried, mostly unsuc-
cessfully, to insure that a greater proportion of these funds are. macic
available to nongovernmental `agencies. Year after year of testimony
and effort have yielded almost no result. In our city, as in many
throughout the country, title XX money is not accessible. to programs
for battered women.
The unpredictability of funding also crea.tes other problems. Even
where seed money is available to start. a shelter. after the first few
years of operation, the very existence of the shelter may be jeoparci-
49-914-79-----iO
PAGENO="0142"
136
ized. Long-term planning and program development is also impeded
by funding constraints. For these reasons, we would like to recom-
mend that 1-I.R. 2977 be amended from a 3-year to a 5-year program
in order to allow more flexibility in funding so that, where appro-
priate, programs may receive funds for up to 5 years.
The shelter movement here and in other parts of the world has been
characterized by its roots in the community. The success of shelters
has in large part been clue to their independence. Not only does a corn-
munity-baseci shelter relieve the government of one more administra.-
tive burden, but it provides services in an efficient and effective manner.
Further, such shelters offer comprehensive services with certain
philosophical ideals like those of self-help and peer support under-
lying all efforts to provide for a woman's psychological and material
well-being. It is these community-based shelters which first responded
to the needs of battered women and developed an expertise in approach-
ing the problem and which can be relied upon to seek creative and
practical solutions in the future.
For all of these reasons, assistance from the Federal Government
in the form proposed in H.R. 2977 is essential to the continued survival
of shelters for battered women and to the creation of the many more
that are so desperately needed.
On behalf of My Sister's Place and the hundreds of other shelters
and support programs for battered women, I wholeheartedly support
H.R. 2977 and urge you to work strenuously for its passage.
Thank you.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you very much.
STATEMENT OF GINGER McMAHON, MARITAL ABUSE PROFECT,
DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNA.
Ms. MOMAHON. Good afternoon. My name is Ginger McMahoh. I
am from Delaware County, Pa. Currently, I am serving as administra.-
tive director of the domestic violence project in my home county. I
am pleased to have the opportunity to offer my testimony to this
committee.
My testimony is drawn from my personal experience as a victim of
domestic violence. I intend to share with you some of the trauma my
children and I experienced as victims of domestic violence and, hope-
fully, to suggest ways of implementing some of the needs which
are critical for adults and children who experience abuse.
My experience is neither isolated nor unique. It is happening as a
daily occurrence to thousands of families in the United States.
As a starting point, let me dispel a popular myth about domestic
violence. Domestic violence is not dictated by race, economic or social
structure, education, or any of the common indicators of community
standing. We are a comfortably established family living in a 12-
room farmhouse on 20 acres.
We owned our own business; we were able to afford vacations, new
cars, recreational vehicles. We were respected members of our com-
munity, a small town conveniently close to a large city. My husband
was active in scouting and served as a little league coach. In addition,
he was a member of the local school board.
PAGENO="0143"
137
I WC:S a member of the junior league and the League of Women
Voters. I was appointed to the mayor's council on drug and alcohol
and the mayor's commission on delinquency, in addition to working
as a volunteer in the juvenile probation office.
We were 12 in our family: my husband and myself, our two nat-
ural Sons, one daughter adopted as an infant, and seven adopted
teenagers. My husband is a college graduate. My education was inter-
rupted by marriage. I found him a brilliant, caring, gentle person.
We shared a strong love for children. I thought of him as a Pied
Piper.
One day the Pied Piper turned into Dr. Jeckyl and Mr. Hyde. We
still do not really know what happened. He began to drink more
frequently. His attitude toward me became critical and dissatisfied.
Within a year he had begun slapping me whenever I disagreed with
him and whenever anything I did did not meet with his approval.
This included everything from my political opinions to what I pre-
pared for meals.
He would shove me, shake me, curse me for not agreeing with his
views on business, religion, our children. If it rained, he held me
responsible. Whatever displeased him or thwarted his plans he blamed.
on me. I had changed from a bright, loving, competent person to a
sullen, hysterical, unattractive, and irresponsible one, according to
him. He began telling me that I was crazy and needed help.
I discussed what was happening with our family physician who
suggested that my husband was frustrated and had other things on.
his mind that were troubling him. My doctor gave me pills.
Ms. MIKUL5KI. I knew you were going to say that.
Ms. MCMAI-JON. He said they would help me to cope with the situa-
tion. He also suggested that I speak to our minister. The minister's
opinion was that it was my duty as a wife and mother to be patient
and tolerant: In short, that I should accept the abuse and keep my
mouth shut. Needless to say, neither the doctor nor the minister was
in any way helpful.
My husband's hostility and violence were increasing, and I was
becoming more afraid to be alone with him. His hostility and rage
were not directed toward anyone else, however; not friends, business
associates, or our children. His rage increased and he be~an to punch
me. I remember the first night that happened. He punched me and
I forced myself to stay quiet so that the children would not be made
aware of what had happened. It is called screaming quietly.
The following day, I was in pain and had difficulty moving about.
He asked me what was wrong, and when I told him that I was in
pain as a result of his punching me, he told me I was crazy and that
I must have fallen. The beatings became more severe. On one occasion
he hit my face and cut me so that I needed stitches. 1-le. accompanied
me to the doctor's office, and he and the doctor concluded that I was
obviously becoming accident prone.
After this incident, he apologized a.nd told me that he would never
do it again. For a while, things improved. He became more attentive,
bought me presents, took me on trips. It was pretty ~ood. Because
I wanted to believe that things would change, I took this brief respite
as an indication that they were changing. 1-lowever. the abuse began
again, to be followed by his remorse and promises for change again.
PAGENO="0144"
138
This constant pattern of violence and remorse began to alter my
behavior and thinking. I became afraid for my life. It became impos-
sible to plan any activities because I never knew when my next "acci-
dent" would occur that might leave me visibly injured or even confined
to bed. It was during this period that I began to lose my identity as a
person. I began to believe that there must be something wrong with me,
that I deserved the abuse, that I was crazy. I became totally isolated
with my fear and humiliation. There was no one to whom I could
turn, no one to talk to.
As a desperate remedy, I suggested marriage counseling to my hus-
band. He became very angry and spent 5 hours telling me that I didn't
deserve to live, and he choked me until I nearly lost consciousness.
During that 5 hours, he "explained" to me how unappreciative I was,
that all my friends were probably being beaten by their husbands as
well, that it was natural for men to beat their wives, that where else
might a man release his frustrations ~
As a result of this incident, my voice box was damaged, and the doc-
tor said that the injury might be permanent. My husband had taunted
me by telling me to try to get a divorce. He told me that if I tried,
he would see to it that I lost the children. With no one to turn to, I knew
I was trapped. I went to friends and the reactions were what I have
since learned is predictable. They didn't believe me, didn't want to get
involved, suggested psychiatrists. And my life was becoming increas-
ingly intolerable.
I knew that I had to get out. One of the resources I found was the
women's counseling center at the University of Massachusetts. It was
about this time that our four oldest children still at home came to me
and told me that they knew about the abuse. The children and I went
to the counseling center where we discussed what was happening. The
psychologist at the center was able to determine that all of the kids,
even the youngest, were aware of the abuse and were suffering emo-
tionally from it. I consulted with my oldest children, recalling them
from college so that we could all share in the decision I was about to
make.
Deciding to leave was easy. Implementing the decision was not.
All that we had, with the exception of one of the cars and the mort-
gage on the house, was in my husband's name. Because of the amount
of children I had, it was impossible to find a place to live. Imagine
if you were a landlord and I came upon you with my entire brood;
what you would say.
My family turned aga.inst me. They could not understand how I
could think of leaving. I should stay and cope, try to make my marriage
work. It was months before we were able to leave, and all during that
time the violence continued. During that time, the children and I drew
closer together. One night my husband's abuse became so bad that the
kids called the police. Because of the way the laws are written, the
police could do nothing unless my husband hit me outside our house.
Then they could arrest him for disorderly conduct or disturbing the
peace. .
The children confronted my husband with their knowledge of his
abuse. He was very angry they had become aware of what was happen-
ing. He decided to leave, but told us that he would never provide any
support. He made good that threat. He destroyed the business. The
PAGENO="0145"
139
property had to be sold to pay off the debts he incurred. The little
that he left us, we used to relocate.
After we left, I found a job and the older children went to college.
My husband returned periodically to harass me, often coming to my
job. Two of my colleagues suggested that I seek employment else-
where as a result of his harassment.
In the next 3 years, much of our time was spent in custody battles,
support hearings, property settlements. I feel that a large part of that
time was lost to the children and me as a result of the endless litiga-
tion in which we were involved.
Despite all the time we spent in litigation, we received no support.
Although he was clever enough to maneuver legally to the point that
he never even paid child support, I somehow feel that we have won
something. We are together as a family. I am angry, I am bitter, I am
disillusioned. The law provided no protection, no support, no redress
for our suffering.
My husband was never brought to account for the abuse, for the lack
of child support, for the lives he interrupted.
Had there been a shelter facility available, we would have been able
to leave much sooner. We would have been spared at least those last
agonizing months of fear and helplessness. Had there been equitable
laws covering domestic violence, we would have had at least some finan-
cial support. I am grateful that I was able to find work, to relocate, to
have the support of my children. But what of the women who cannot
relocate, who have no job skills, whose children are unaware or too
young, or who are bought off by their fathers?
I am the administrative director of the Marital Abuse project, which
has been in operation for 31/2 years. We provide hotline and options
counseling, court and hospital accompaniment, court advocacy, police
training, and a variety of other sophisticated services. We have several
funding resources, including LEAA, private foundations, and local
money.
We have also tried, unsuccesfully, to obtain title XX money. We all
know what happened to title XX. In spite of all of this, we have not
been able to fund our shelter in Delaware County. We own a nine-bed-
room house, just deeded to us, which we could use for a shelter, but we
haven't been able to get funds for the actual operation of the shelter.
We need $85,000 to operate for a year.
Our experience and that of most groups throughout the country is
that operating funds are the most difficult to obtain, yet critical, if we
are to begin to meet the emergency needs of victims of domestic vio-
lence. H.R. 2977 would provide that essential funding.
As a former victim of domestic violence, as an individual working
with abused women, I cannot urge too strongly the need for more and
better shelter facilities and for stronger and more effective laws pro~~
tecting the rights of women and children.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you very much.
I would like to recognize for a moment, before our next witness,
Congressman Bob Edgar, who I know was here several times earlier
this morning, to testify in support of one of the witnesses.
Mr. EDGAR. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would just like to commend you and Barbara for the actions you
are taking today in holding these hearings, and also to commend Gin-
PAGENO="0146"
140
gel, who is from my congressional district and has been very articulate
in sharing, from her personal point of view, the kinds of conflicts that
she has had in the past with domestic violence.
I first became aware of this issue `long before I ever thought that
I would be a Congressman. I was a cofounder of a service called the
People's Emergency Center, in the city of Philadelphia, which is a
shelter for women and families, that was instituted `back in 1972. It
grew out of my work with the Philadelphia police-clergy unit. I was
amazed, in going back to accident wards and police stations in north
Philadelphia, to see women and families huddled in the corner, wait-
ing to get through the night, because of a domestic quarrel or a utility
failure that had occurred in a home somewhere in the urban center of
Philadelphia.
When I explored the situation a little further, I discovered there
were three shelters for vagrant males and no shelters for women, so
we took an old church on `Chestnut Street in Philadelphia and ren-
ovated the first floor. Without asking any permission from the State
or local authorities, we simply opened a shelter. We thought maybe we
would help 100 or 200 families during the course of a year.
In the first year of operation, we helped 2,000 people who came to
the center, people who were homeless because of a variety of reasons.
Most of them were women running away from something, and usually
the running away was from a husband who was causing quite a bit of
pain and trouble.
Late into the night, when women and families were staying in our
shelter on weekends, many times we discovered the same kind of thing
Ginger has described, and that is the harassment from the husband,
the banging on the door of the church to get in.
I think it is extremely unfortunate that the legislation which you
have been so active in pushing over the last couple of years has not
attained the support of the majority of the House and Senate. I
think it is about time we move on it. We get caught in all kinds of
pressures here, fiscal and otherwise, but I believe that this is a priority
piece of legislation. I am willing to put my name on it and am willing
to do whatever I can to support the effort.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Thank you.
Mr. Mu~LER. Thank you, Bob.
Ms. Dames?
STATEMENT OP CYNTHIA DAMES, CHAIRPERSON, NATIONAL
COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Ms. DAMES. My name is Cynthia Dames. I am chairperson of the
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. I am also director of
a shelter for battered women in Santa Fe, N. Mex., which serves pri-
marily Hispanic, Chicano, and native American women.
I will try to make my brief testimony briefer. In the past couple
of years, the people of this country have become aware of the problem
of violent attacks on women by their husbands, boyfriends, and adult
sOns. The magnitude of the violence perpetrated on women in the home
is not yet, however, fully understood by the public.
The ramifications of this violence are not entirely apparent, but it
is clear that continued violence against women in this society is intoler-
PAGENO="0147"
141
able. Women across this Nation are calling a halt to the violence, are
rescuing battered women, and are helping women find alternatives to
living a life of terror at the hands of the men that they love.
As said previously, but I think it bears being said again, battering
knows no class, race, religion, age, or geographical background. We
know that many of the women in this room today, and a majority of
the women that we each know, are victims of domestic violence. This
violence may be merely a slap, a punch, or a kick, but in our experience,
the violence that occurs much more likely includes burning, cutting
with knives, attempted strangulation, rape, facial disfigurement, and
repeated and prolonged assault on the breasts and stomach, frequent-
ly causing miscarriage and/or organic injury.
Last year in Maryland, local law enforcement agencies received
approximately 15,000 complaints of spousal abuse. A shelter in Pitts-
burgh, Pa., has been receiving 100 calls a day from women seeking
shelter and support from husbands and boyfriends. One-half of all
couples in the United States have experienced at least one incident
of physical violence in their relationship.
Of the assault victims seeking medical assistance at the emergency
room of a Boston hospital, 70 percent were victims of domestic vio-
lence. In it first year of operation, a Louisville, Ky., shelter lodged
555 women and children and answered approximately 2,700 hotline
calls.
The community-based shelter program in Orlando, Fla., sheltered
149 women and children in a 2-month period in 1978. Many shelters
across the country, and I think it is important to be aware of this. are
actually turning away victims of domestic violence because of lack
of space. Some programs have found they are unable to house as many
as 30 women and children requesting shelter each day.
In a recent report of the Office of the Attorney General of the State
of Ohio came the startling revelation that, although there were 16
shelters in that State. 69 more were needed to meet the needs of victims
of domestic assault. Thus, 82 percent of the need in Ohio is unmet.
Funding is meager. The St. Louis abused women's support project
is primarily funded from individual donations, from $5 to $100.
Most shelter programs, as we have heard, have begim with one or two
unpaid women coordinating the efforts of a number of volunteers.
Frequently the shelter was the home of one of the workers.
Securing funding has allowed numbers of these groups to rent a
shelter facility to meet operating expenses and to hire small staffs.
Typically, the shelter will include a fimdraiser, administrator, a house
manager, a child care worker, and a victim advocate. Volunteers con-
tinue to.be the backbone of the shelters.
Expansion of the staff in shelters of this size is essential to the con-
tinuity of the staff and the sustained energy of the volunteers. For
most staff people and many volunteers in shelter programs, they work
at least 11 hours a day, 6 days a week. Ten thousand women and
20~000 children were sheltered or provided with other needed services
by the 19 shelter programs affiliated with the Pennsylvania Coalition
Against Domestic Violence last year.
None of these programs have secure funding. All face the possibility
of closing this year. Fewer than 15 State legislatures across the country
have enacted laws providing funding for shelters. Most of this legisla-
PAGENO="0148"
142
tion does not establish permanent fllncling mechanisms. Almost all of
it is inadequate to meet the needs of shelter programs.
About 70 percent of the existing shelters obtain funding from pri-
vate and local. sources. Less than 50 percent receive any State or
Federal moneys. Almost all piece their budgets together from multiple
funding sources. Even for the most sophisticated shelter programs,
securing secure funding has taken years.
You heard earlier from Minnesota. Women's Advocates of St. Paul,
for example, spent 7 years developing secure funding. Other programs
in Minnesota must rely heavily on local and private sources to com-
plete their budgeting requirements.
Many States have not made moneys available to shelter programs
when it was within their power to do so. Here is where we come in con-
tact with the title XX issue. TitleXX moneys are virtually impossible
in many States. The National Coalition, as a matter of fact, will be
submitting a paper detailing some of our concerns and some of the
roadblocks that we see in the administration of title XX funding.
Stat.es need the incentives that H.R. 2977 provides. Clearly, most
have not acted on their own initiative to generate funds for domestic
violence programs. However, we are certain that, once they have par-
ticipateci in the grant process provided in this legislation, they will
recognize the need to generate new moneys or reallocate appropriate
funds to sustain the shelter programs. Here too, it is just a. question
of education. I think that is wha.t we are looking for in terms of
funding, to buy time to be able to do that educating within our local
communities.
Let me turn our attention to who we a.re, the National Coalition. The
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence represents many of the
more than 400 community-based shelter and hotline programs all over
th~ United States. Our programs Provide a multitude of services to
battered women. These services include counseling, child care, agency
advocacy, legal assistance, medical referral, court and police accom-
paniment, housing assistance, emergency hotline assistance, employ-
memit training and referral, parenting courses, budgeting and fiscal.
management assistance, as well as sheltering.
The philosophical underpinning of all these services is self-help,
victims helping victims, growth through shared experience and sup-
port. We believe this is the most effective process for escaping the
cycle of violence and embracing a life free of fear a.nd the immobility
that violence creates.
The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence began as a con-
cept at the Milwaukee Domestic Violence Conference in 1976. There
was strong feeling among the participa.nts that the many existing and
emerging shelter programs could benefit through association with
each other to share information, materials, problems, and skills. It
was also agreed that there was a growing need to orga.nize on both
statewide and national levels to bring the issue of domestic violence
to the attention of the public and to persuade Government leaders
to make policies and pass legislation that assure the growth and
development of services to the victims of domestic violence and their
children.
The National Coalition was formalized as an organization at the
Civil Rights Consultation on Domestic Violence held here in March
1978. Hundreds of people, representing battered women's programs
PAGENO="0149"
143
from every State in the ljnion, participated in this exchange and
recognized the need to continue a dialog among community-based
shelter programs.
Consequently, the Coalition was born. We are planning to return
to Washington, not uncoincidentaily, for a national meeting of the
membership of this grassroots coalition. At that time certainly, and
this week as we return home, we intend to share with our constitu-
ents and with our congressional representatives our support of 2977.
On behalf of the Coalition, we would like to thank both you, spe-
cifically, Congresswomen Mikulski, and Congressman Miller, for your
attention to this issue. MTe would also like to thank the committee for
allowing these hearings to take place. It is amazing the advocacy and
work that has been done by shelters of this nature on enormously low
budgets.
\~\Te invite committee people to come and visit their local shelters,
spend time with staffs as well as the people we serve and work with,
the victims, and begin the educational process of learning what we
are seeing out there in the community.
Thank you for your support, and we offer our support for H.R.
2977.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you. We appreciate that.
Barbara ~
Ms. MIKTJLSKI. Thank you, Mr. Miller.
First of all, I would like to thank you and compliment you on your
testimony. I am reminded of when George and I were here last
March, or March a year ago, when we thought we were really going
to be able to put it over a term ago. Again, we were, I think, inspired
and energized in terms of our own efforts in the Congress by listening
to the people who are either directly affected or who are the front line
people.
In addition to people like yourself, we had a legal aid lawyer from
Appalachia and a woman who was trying to run a shelter on an In-
dian reservation. One of the things that strikes you is, No. 1, not
only the incredible need and the bravery of the victims as they try
to grapple with their own lives, but really the strength and courage
of the people involved in the shelter movement.
Congressman Miller spoke earlier about my leadership and I talk
about his leadership, but I will tell you, sometimes it is really a drag
being here trying to advocate this legislation. And one of the reasons
the hearings are important is not only to build a record of the need but
to really engerize those of us who have a different set of national prior-
ities sometimes than the dominant mentality. So it is very helpful to
have you here.
Ms. Dames, I have a question I do want to ask you.
One of the things that continually comes up, for example~ as Ms.
Moore raised. is what do you do when the seed money runs out? As
someone who has worked both as a social worker at a local level and as
a city councilwoman, that is a problem that comes up all of the time.
I wonder if part of your coalition's effort and if maybe part of the
kinds of things we need to pay attention to in funding is the education
and provision of technical assistance for grassroots groups on how to
raise money.
PAGENO="0150"
144
One of the hardest problems I had when I got into politics was to
find out how to raise money for a campaign, and I didn't know how to
do that. I knew how to run programs. I had done all of those things. But
I just wonder if that is something the coalition has thought about, if
you think that is a needed framework in the tecimical assistance to be
provided. And I don't mean raising money by Government sources,
but from the United Fund, private fundraising and so on. I just won-
dered what you think about that.
Ms. DAMES. There is no question there is a need for continued tech-
nical assistance in learning how to raise money. I think there are peo-
ple within the grassroots movement who have done that very, very
succesfully. You would be surprised at the creativity that has been used
within this movement to keep shelters going this long.
The problem is that we are so swamped with our individual shelters
and the demands that come on those and the constant issue of survival
for those that it is an additional burden for us then to go and travel
across the State or across country to begin to teach other people how
to do adequate fundraising.
That is not to say that we don't do it. I am building a coalition right
now in New Mexico and have been working with several gToups in
terms of teaching them how to do fundraising. What I am saying is the
expertise is there within the grassroots movement. It is a question of
being so underfunded that it is an additional burden for us to travel
to whatever area to begin to share that expertise.
With the funding you are suggesting, I think that it would allow us
the time, which is one of the most critical things, to not only build up
our own shelters in terms of State and local government sources, pri-
vate sources, and other social service resources, but to begin to do in a
more consistent way the kind of education amongst ourselves that you
are suggesting.
For example, part of the goal of this national conference which we
will be having in October-there will be three goals. actually. One
will be to teach lobbying skills and how to work with legislators on a
State and National level, which we are sure will be useful in October.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Can we come? [General laughter.]
Ms. DAMES. I am sure you could educate us.
Ms. MIKUL5KI.When is your meeting going to be?
Ms. DAMES. It will be October 10 through October 14.
The second goal of the conference will be to teach organizing skills
on a local, regional, and national scale, and the third would be to arrive
at media strategies on a local, regional, and national level. That is all,
finding people within our movement who have that kind of expertise
who have been very successful to teach others about how to be more
successful at those kinds of things.
Ms. MIKULSKI. Thank you. I just have one other question, if the
chairman will allow.
A great deal of emphasis during this discussion today has been on
the need for shelters, but the bill has several other components. One is
the Federal coordinating council so that the food stamp program
makes sense in terms of shelters, and there is a media thing-public
service announcements and whatever. I just wonder if any of the mein-
bers of the panel have had a chance to look at that and if they feel that
it is a necessary component of the legislation.
PAGENO="0151"
145
Ms. DAMES. I myself think it is absolutely necessary to the legisla-
tion. I also think that a civilian group, as it were, of people who would
accompany and work with that interagency council is absolutely
crucial. The reason is, that so many of us get so involved in the
particular urea we are working in, the unfortunate thing that hap-
pens is that we get further and further away from the real issues
that confront the victims of domestic violence.
So that if we indeed had ~ victims, grassroots people involved in
direct service programs like the ones we represent, I think that that
kind of balance of both the sophistication and knowing how the Fed-
eral Government works and what things can and cannot be changed,
along with the sophistication of knowing what is needed and what is
not needed, could be a very powerful experience and one that would
be growthful for both sides.
Ms. MucLiLsicI. Thank you. I would like to thank the other members
of the Panel even though questions were not specifically addressed to
them.
I would also like to note that Senator Cranston still has not intro-
duced the bill over on the Senate side. Congressman Miller and I have
conferred about that. I have already had a terrible argument with
Senator Cranston about it, and my feeling is that if he does not, I
would like you all to perhaps convey to him the intensity of your
concerns. It is my feeling if he doesn't do it by near the time we get
ready to adjourn in July, we are prepared to go find another sponsor.
Ms. MCMAHON. Thank you.
Mr. EDGAR. I have one followup comment, and that is on how to
lobby. Barbara has rightfully spoken about the need to put some
pressure on Senator Cranston. But it seems to me there are some other
important facets of lobbying, and that is the notion of eye contact, of
actually taking House Members by the arm, showing them the shelter,
and having them experience the impact of what is happening to women
in their communities.
We spin like tops here in Washington. We get 20,000 different bills
introduced. We get 185 committees and subcommittees who run around
in all directions. And those of us who do not serve on this committee
may not have the opportunity to learn about the problem unless you
teach us.
The best lobbying is to try to contact the Member in his or her dis-
trict and to extcnd an invitation to visit the district, contact me by in-
viting me to come to a facility. I would hesitate against using form
letters and petitions. They may be very helpful in organizing your
own groups but not very helpful here in Washington. It becomes a
clerical problem for us to get the letters pumped out. I think more
effective is to make actual contact.
If you cannot get the Congressman himself, then get his district
staff to spend a day at your shelter and focus on the issue, and then
every 6 months or every year, renew that experience.
I appreciate the testimony I have heard and I want to congratulate
you for coming. I think that you really are the movers and shakers of
this legislation; and if it is going to move, we need 218 votes in the
House and 51 votes in the Senate, and word-for-word agreement be-
tween the two bodies. And that is really your goal and our goal as well.
Mr. MILLER. Let me thank you very much for coming and testifying,
PAGENO="0152"
146
and I am sorry that it took until so late in the day to have your panel.
As you know, Congressman Simon, the chairman of the subcommit-
tee, indicated it would be his desire to try to come to mark up this
legislation and report it from the committee immediately after Labor
Day, so maybe we can give you an actual case to work on in October
in lobbying. We can measure your successes and our successes.
Thank you so much for sharing your knowledge and your experi-
ence with the committee.
The committee will continue these hearings tomorrow morning in
room 2261.
[Whereupon, at 3 :25 p.m., the hearing was recessed.]
PAGENO="0153"
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE: PREVENTION AND SERVICES
WEDNESDAY, JULY 11, 1~79
HousE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SELECT EDUCATION OF THE
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR,
iVa$hington, D.C.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to adjournment, in room 2261, Ray-
burn House Office Building, Hon. Paul Simon (chairman of the sub-
committee), presiding.
Members present: Representatives Simon, Miller, Hawkins, Stack,
Kramer, Coleman, and Erdahi.
Staff present: Judith Wagner, staff director; Thomas Birch, coun-
sel; Sylvia Corbin, executive secretary; Rhonda Barovsky, secretary;
and Jennifer Vance, minority legislative associate.
Mr. SIMoN. The Subcommittee on Select Education will resume its
hearings.
Our witnesses compose a panel, Fay Warren, General Federation
of \Vomen's Clubs; Jane Campbell, the National Council of Churches;
Beth Olson, Junior League of Jacksonville, Fla.; and Dr. Kinsey
Green, executive director, American Home Economics Association.
The four of you, if you are here, would you take your seat in the
f rout? If you would identify yourselves, both for us and our reporter,
that would be helpful.
Ms. KINSEY. I am Kinsey Green, executive director, American
Home Economics Association.
Ms. CAMPBELL. I am Jane Campbell, National Council of Churches.
Ms. OLSON. I a.m Beth Olson, Junior League of Jacksonville.
Mr. SIMON. All right, Ms. Campbell, we will begin with you. The
procedure is, if you have formal statements, if you wish to read them,
t.ha.t is fine. If you wish to enter them in the record and summarize
them to save a little time, that is also fine-however, you wish to
proceed.
Ms. CAMPBELL. We have a formal statement, which we will enter
into the record, and I will summarize it for you.
Mr. SIMON. All right, that statement will be entered into the record.
[Prepared statement of Jane Campbell follows:]
STATEMENT OF JANE CAMPBELL, NATIONAL COUNCIL OF CHURCHES
Chairman Simon, Members of the Subcommittee, and guests. I am Jane
Campbell, a member of the Justice for Women Working Group of the National
Council of Churches. At home in Cleveland I serve as the Executive Director
of Womenspace, a coalition of fifty organizations that work for social change
for the betterment of women. As a result of that activity, I served on the
Ohio Attorney Generals Task Force on Domestic Violence.
The National Council of Churches of Christ in the U.S.A. is a cooperative
agency of thirty-two Protestant and Orthodox bodies in this country. I do not
purport to speak for all members of the communions which are constituent to
(147)
PAGENO="0154"
148
the National Council of Churches. I am speaking for the Justice of Women
Working Group, which is a core unit of the Division of Church and Society.
~his group's task is to address issues which deny the personhood of one half
of our population as well as initiate policy in this area through the Governing
Board. This Board is the policy-making body composed of persons selected by
~meinber denominations in proportion to their size. It is this group which deter-
hiines the policy decision through which the Council seeks to fulfill its expressed
purpose "to study and to speak and to act on conditions and issues in the
national and the world which involve moral, ethical and spiritual principles
inherent in the Christian gospel."
The National Council of Churches is grateful for this opportunity to testify
before you today on "The Domestic Violence Prevention and Services Act of
11979" (H.R. 2977), a bill designed to address the compelling social problems
of violence within the family. We commend the subcommittee for holding hear-
ings on what we believe to be a crucial issue that tears apart the fibers of our
nation's people and families in particular.
As early as February 22, 1967 the Governing Board passed a Policy Statement
entitled "Church-States Issues for Social and Health Services in the U.S.A."
in which it recommended: "that every local church develop a committee devoted
to study, discussion and action on social problems; attention to such social
welfare problems as economic dependency, family breakdown, separation,
divorce, delinquency, alcoholism, mental illness and problems of aging * *
It is from such study as well as the experience of our members involved in
community social service problems that "the need for a balanced range of pre-
~entive and treatment services is apparent." The policy urges the "support for
the development of needed services * ~" and asks service agencies to acti-
vate "~ specific attention to questions of public policy affecting those family
and social problems with which it is most concerned." HR. 2977 addresses an
issue of our concern and of our social justice action as w-ell as one such needed.
service for our local communities. We are grateful for the awareness of congress-
people to the is~ue and will continue to work for and to support your efforts
for passage of this bill.
Taking seriously the responsibility to help shape sound public social policy
nnd committed to improving the lives of those who are victims of violence, the
National Council of Churches in September 1978 was a participant in an amicus
brief in the city of New York regarding the rights of women to receive protection
orders from Family Court. The case is now in the New- York State Court of
Appeals. We believe H.R. 2977 is another good step in that direction.
The bill under consideration today is long past due. It is a well-targeted piece
of legislation that provides assistance and support of local activity. Even..though
the economic mood of Congress and the country may be against spending money
or anything, we would be dangerously short-sighted to continue to ignore the
plight of women and children who suffer from physical abuse within their ow-n
home. Every sociological study that has been done on this topic indicates that
the pattern of violence repeats in succeeding generations. Therefore, we must
intervene in the cycle in order to prevent the children of today from becoming
the victims and abusers of tomorrow.
One particularly laudable part of this bill is the focus on private and non-
profit agencies. Most of the effort that has brought the needs and concerns of
battered women out of secrecy and into the public arena has been generated and
8ustained by small groups of women in local areas. We have taken battered
women and their children into our homes, raised money at potluck suppers. bake
sales and cocktail parties, and relied on volunteers and donations. Local churches
have taken up offerings and have given us use of their basements. Pastors have
tome to us seeking assistance for members of their congregations. In some areas
community foundations have responded.
Still, shelters suffer from financial instability and lack of recognition of the
need for their services. This bill could change that situation by establishing vio-
lence in the home-which is almost always violence against women and cliii-
dren-as behavior that will no longer be tolerated by this society, and by pro-
viding money and technical assistance to those groups who are willing to work
with the victims, especially those who have already undertaken the task. The
Congress has the opportunity to participate in the making of a stronger and
safer society.
As a pioneer person in this area and out of my experience and research, every
~she1ter that has opened in this country has far more demands for its services
that it can handle. Especially in the early stages w-hen staff members are busy
PAGENO="0155"
149
making the connections between welfare, job-training assistance, housing re-
sources, counselling agencies and educational institutions that victims of domestic
violence need to rebuild their lives, stable financial support for these efforts is
essential. Once the service exists within a community, that community can no
longer deny that the problem exists. The clients of the service and their children
are living proof of both its value and its necessity.
In Cleveland, we have been fortunate to have two generous and progressive
community foundations. After a group of ten women brought the issue to the
public attention in 1976 through a media campaign and a series of community
meetings and began to provide counselling services and some shelter, we were
awarded three years of stable support. Now in 1979, our shelter received funds
from the county, lives in a donated house that is being renovated with city
community development block grant funds, operates a CETA-funded job training
program, and receives funds from the United Way Services. That development
took three years, but now the shelter is stable and will be able to focus its energy
on providing quality services to its clients rather than on financial survival.
Finally, the staff is being paid a living wage. This example is proof that the
kind of program outlined in HR. 2977 can work.
In Cuyahoga County the Policy Chief's Association estimates that there are
27,000 battered women. This is merely an indication of the scope of the problem.
A problem of this magnitude cannot possibly be addressed by private foundations
alone.
Someone you know is or has been a victim of domestic violence. Estimates of
~tIomestic violence by sociologists and psychologists that involve physical abuse
range from 25-50 percent of all marriages. The problem is just as prevalent in the
suburbs and rural areas as it is in the inner city. Your constituents have the
right to your commitment to their safety.
As you deliberate, consider this bill a means of strengthening the family unit
and enabling the survival of love, affection and caring among family members.
A family member who fears for her life and safety cannot provide good care for
her children or herself. A shelter gives her the opportunity for safety and repair
~f broken relationships with her children.
We urge you to move this much-needed legislation along its process as quickly
as possible. Know that we will be working with you and your contituents for the
passage of HR. 2977.
Thank you.
NATIONAL COUNCIL OF THE CHURCHES OF CHRIST IN THE U.S.A.,
Washington, D.C., July 11, 1979.
PAUL SIMON,
Chairman, House Subcommittee on Select Education.
The following organizations express a basic concern for the victims of domestic
violence and support legislation that assists our local social agencies and people
ivorking with this issue.
Rev. PAUL KITTLAUS, JESSMA BLOCKwICK,
Director, Director,
Washington Office, Population Department,
Office for Church in Society, Board of Church and Society,
United Church of Christ. United Methodist Church.
i\IARY JANE PATTERSON, JUNE TOTTEN,
Director, Director of Governmental Relations,
Washington Office, American Baptist Churches, U.S.A.
United Presbyterian Church, U.S.A. ROBERT Z. ALPERN,
Rabbi DAVID SAPERSTEIN, Director,
Union of American Hebrew Unitarian Universalists Association,
Congregations. Washington Office.
RUBY RHOADES, CHARLES V. BERGSTROM,
Washington Representatives, Executive Director,
Church of the Brethren. Office for Governmental Affairs,
ARIE R. BROUwER, Lutheran Council in the U.S.A.
General Secretary,
Ref ormed Church in America.
JOYCE HAMLIN,
Women's Division,
Board of Global Ministries,
United Methodist Church.
PAGENO="0156"
150
STATEMENT OP ~1ANE CAMPBELL, NATIONAL
COUNCIL OP CHURCHES
Ms. CAMPBELL. Chairman Simon, and members of the subcommit-
tee, I am Jane Campbell, a member of the Justice for Women Working
Group of the National Council of Churches, which is a core unit of
the Division of Church and Society.
At home, in Cleveland, Ohio, I am the director of the ~\Tomen's
Base Coalition, which is a coalition of 50 women's organizations that
works toward social change for the betterment of women. In con-
nection with that activity, I was appointed, last year, to the State
of Ohio's Task Force on Domestic Violence, where we analyzed the
laws in the State of Ohio, and the services that were available, and
made specific recommendations.
I was also involved in helping to create the first shelter for bat-
tereci women in Ohio.
The National Council of Churches is grateful for this opportunity
to testify before you on the Domestic Violence Prevention a.nd Treat-
inent Services Act of 1979, House Bill 2977.
We commend the subcommittee for holding hearings on what we
believe to be a crucial issue that tears apart the fibers of our Nation's
people and our families in particular.
The National Council of Churches, as early as February 1967. set
policy in its governing board for local churches to see the need for a
balanced range of preventive and treatment. services. Furthermore.
the National Council of Churches was a participant in an amicus brief
in September 1978 in the city of New York regarding the rights of
women to receive protection orders from the family court. This case is
now pending in the New York State Court of Appeals.
The bill that we are considering today is long past due. It is a
well-targeted piece of legislation that provides assistance and support
of local activities. It does not purport to set up a whole new Federal
bureaucracy, but rather one of the particularly laudable parts of it is
that it deals with private and nonprofit agencies on a. local level.
Most of the effort that has brought the needs and concerns of bat-
tered women out of secrecy and into the public arena has been gen-
erated and sustained by small groups of women in local areas.
We have taken battered women and their children into our houses.
lYe have raised n'ioney at potluck suppers; we have had bake sales:
we have had cocktail parties, and we have relied on volunteers and
donations. Still, the shelter suffered desperately from financial in-
stability and lack of reco~rnition of the need for our services.
This bill could change that situation by establishing that violence
in the home, which is almost always violence against women and
children, is behavior that is no longer going to be tolerated by this
society, and that the Congress is willing to provide some money to do
something about it. The Congress has the opportunity to narticipate
in making a stronger and safer society by passing his bill.
From my experience and my research, I know that every shelter in
this country that has opened, has had far more demands for its serv-
ices than it can handle, especially in the initial stages. when the staff
is busy making the proper connections between the welfare system,
the job training assistance programs, housing resources, counseling
activities, and educational institutions. It is imperative that the shelter
have stable financial support.
PAGENO="0157"
151
Once the service exists within a community, it is no longer possible
for that community to deny that the service is needed. In Cleveland,
we were lucky. We had two progressive foundations that gave us
3 years of solid financial support for our shelter.
Now, in 1979, 3 years later, the shelter is stable. It is living in ti
donated house that is being renovated with community development
bloc grant funds from the city. It has received funds -from the county.
It operates a CETA funded job training program. It receives stable
funding from United Way Services.
That development took us 3 years, but now we have a stable shelter.
The need for this kind of development is nationwide, and cannot be
handled by private foundations alone. In Cuyahoga County alone.
our police cheifs estimate that there are 27,000 reported cases of
violence against women in the home. So it is clear that there needs to
be Federal money made available to get these services underway.
Domestic violence is a problem that has permeated throughout our
society. It exists in rich areas~ in poor areas, in the suburbs as well as
in the cities. Your constituents and friends of yours have been victims
of domestic violence.
As you deliberate, I would urge you to consider this bill as a means
of strengthening the family unit, and enabling the survival of love,
affection, and caring among family members. A family member who
fears for her life and safety cannot provide good care for her children
or for herself. The shelter gives her the opportunity for safety and
to repair the relationships with her children.
I have attached to this testimony signatures from various church
groups who are concerned about domestic violence, and we join to-
gether in urging you to move this much needed legislation along its
process as quickly as possible.
YoU can depend on our support, to work with you, and know that
we will help in any way we can toward the passage of H.R. 2977.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Surow. Thank you very much, Ms. Campbell.
What we will do is hear from all members of the panel, and then
have questions.
Ms. Olson, if you would proceed.
[Prepared statement of Beth Olson follows:]
THE JUNIOR LEAGUE OF JACKSONVILLE, INC.,
Jacksonville, Fla.
TESTIMONY ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Prepared for: The Subcommittee on Select Education.
Submitted by: Beth Tebault Olson, Junior League, of Jacksonville, Inc., Jack-
sonville, Florida.
Presented on: July 11, 1979, Washington, D.C.
Representatives Miller and members of the subcommittee: The Junior League
of Jacksonville is one of 229 Junior Leagues throughout the country, representing
125,000 individual members. I am pleased that our League has been asked to
testify to this committee on the subject of domestic violence.
The purpose of the Junior League is to promote voluntarism, and to develop
the potential of its members for voluntary participation in community affairs and
to demonstrate the effectiveness of trained volunteers.
Each member in the Junior League goes through an initial training course
which familiarizes her with all the important facets of the community in which
she lives.
49-914-79---1I
PAGENO="0158"
152
I am here due to my League's commitment, interest and involvement in Hub-
hard House, which is the name of Jacksonville's shelter for physically abused
women and sexually abused children.
My testimony is based oa my direct involvement with Hubbard House as a
Tolunteer and Board member and is coupled with 16 years of volunteer service
within the community.
IS ABUSE REALLY A PROBLEM
The F.B.I. reports indicate that there are three times more incidents of wife
nbuse reported than rape and there is a rape reported every three minutes.
According to Jacksonville, Florida's Sheriff's D~partment 50 to 60 percent of
all police calls are in response to family quarrels. Complaints about police in-
difference abound, but we have to concede some justification for on a national
level the F.B.I. reports that one-fourth of all police killed in 1974 were trying to
break up family fights.
Prior to my becoming involved with Hubbard House, I did volunteer work for
Legal Aid. My job was to interview prospective clients seeking dissolution and
to see if they qualified for Legal Aid's services. It became very clear during my
four years of interviewing that spouse abuse was for our community a definite
reality. Not only did I hear testimony to physical abuse, I was on numerous
occasions witness to the results of it. I would estimate that of the 900 women
I interviewed 70 to 80 percent had experienced physical abuse.
The first shelter for battered women in the United States came into being
in 1974 in St. Paul, Minnesota. In just five years, 200 other shelters have come
Into existence and they are all filled to overflowing!
HUBBARD HOU5E
Plans for Jacksonville's shelter were conceived early in 1975 by a group of
feminists who had the right combination of concern, dedication and energy. This
group of women was able. to find .`~seed" ~money from a private, local foundation
and Hubbard House opened officially in May of 1976 making it the first shelter
in the Southeast and the fourteenth shelter in the United States.
No one could have perceived that the need for our shelter was as great as it is.
The tiny three bedroom house was swamped with women and children needing
refuge.
Hubbard House reached out to the heart of our community and it responded.
Money came from everywhere-clubs, churches, individuals and business. Money
from the grass roots of our community and money that amounted to ~60,000 the
first year.
During that first year of operation Hubbard House sheltered 200 physically
abused women and their 325 children. Information, referral and counseling was
given to over 200 walk-ins and 2,000 hot line and information calls were answered.
The very first year, still in its infancy, and Hubbard House touched on the lives
of 2,725 women!
It became obvious by the second year of operation that they simply had to have
more room. The search was on and in time they located an old rooming house
that was in horrible condition but had the space and location that made up for
its imperfections.
The Junior League, well aware of the need for a larger facility, gave us the
~lown payment and the community once again rallied forth with the money for
the needed renovations.
PREVENTION
It was during this period that the staff and Board of Directors agreed to try
to keep our small facility as well. Since Hubbard House began operating in 1976
it was painfully obvious that the children of families suffering domestic violence
were in desperate need of a program designed for them. Statistically we knew
the risks were extremely high that they would grow up to be abusive and/or
abused themselves. A proposal was outlined and submitted to our downtown
Rotary. Our project was chosen and we are now in the process of imnlementation.
The importance of the children's program in our growth and direction is truly
monumental. Hubbard House and, in fact, many other agencies, as well as the
funding sources, have got to address the subject of preventiom~ or be resolved
to the perpetuation of the problem. We are positive that we need shelters and
tl1e statistics demand that we need prevention.
PAGENO="0159"
153
WHERE IS DOMESTIC VIOLENCE?
Domestic violence is in all neighborhoods-yours, mine, and tl1eirs. The
:popular assumption that marital violence occurs more frequently in the ghetto
and among the lower class families is clearly not true.
Studies of Fairfax County, Virginia (one of the wealthiest counties in the
United States) compare with West Harlem and Norwalk, Connecticut, in that
the population as well as the domestic violence are the same.
The Jacksonville police offense reports on spouse abuse clearly show that the
calls they receive are equally distributed among the South, North, East and
West areas of our city.
Many would be somewhat surprised to learn that the average woman in
Jacksonville who utilizes our shelter is white, 29 years old, has two children,
has been married 6 years and has a family income of $13,000 a year.
TODAY PLUS TOMORROW EQUALS FUNDING
From January to June of 1979, Hubbard House has served:
Women 235
Children 349
Males (wife beaters who received counseling) 14
Black 61
lVhite 172
Other 3
Walk-ins 192
White 124
Black 54
Other 13
Hot line and information calls 2, 650
From January to June of 1979, Hubbard House has served 235 women, 349
children, 14 wife beaters, 192 walk-ins, and answered 2,650 hot line and in-
formation calls. With six months left in the year, we have assisted in varying
degrees, 3,439 women and children.
Traditionally, programs for women have been under funded. Hubbard House
operates on 14 the budget of some agencies we know of while serving three
times the number of people. Our funding sources must improve if we are to stay
in operation and improve considerably if we are to move in the area of pre-
i-ention.
At present Hubbard House is operating with the following seven funding
-sources:
United Way $26, 000
LEAA 25, 875
CETA 23, 875
State 20, 000
Community donations 14, 000
Foundations 3, 000
Resident house fees 1, 200
As you know two of our funding sources are not permanent (LEAA and CETA).
Community donations, foundations, Resident House fees and, in fact, United
Way will vary.
Our state money is rather unique in that five dollars has been added to the
cost of marriage licejises in Florida and this "added" money in turn will be
allocated to the shelters in the state. Stipulations are attached to the money in
that you must have an existing shelter and $25000 in matching funds. The maxi-
nmum money given to any one shelter will not exceed $50,000. This innovative
piece of legislation was brought into being by Senators Ken Plant and Betty
Castor in 1978.
In closing, I'd like to share with you an incident that took place last week. I
was w-orking at Hubbard House w-hen Ned, a fourteen year old boy with cerebral
Palsy decided to sit dow-n and talk a while. He asked me in his slow, labored
speech if I were married. I told him I was and I asked him if he were married. He
grinned for a moment but then his expression changed and in the gravest
irianner possible said. "Marriage is not good for your life." What a pathetic sight
he w-as-thin, pale, his arms hooked over and his legs bent and twisted.
PAGENO="0160"
154
I thought for a moment of telling him some marriages were not violent but
something in his expression and even in his tone told me the subject was closed.
Ned's seven year old brother came in counting aloud. He asked if I could count
to one hundred and I said that I could. He was pleased that I could count,
I think, for he asked me which numbers were larger, 100 or 1,000, and several
other questions pertaining to counting. At one point. Ned's little forehead
wrenched into a frown and he asked, "Do numbers ever end?"
David's mother called for both boys just then and as he left the room
with Ned struggling after him, I wondered do numbers of abuse victims
end? How far do we count until the numbers end?
STATEMENT OP BETH OLSON, J~UNIOR LEAGUE,
JACKSONVILLE, PLA.
Ms. OLsoN. Chairman Simon, and members of the subcommittee. The
Junior League of Jacksonville is one of 229 junior leagues throughout
the country, representing 125,000 individual members. I am pleased
that our league has been asked to testify to this committee on the sub-
The purpose of the Junior League is to promote vo1untarism~ and to
develop the potential of its members for voluntary participation in
community affairs and to demonstrate the effectiveness of trained
volunteers
Each member in the Junior League goes through an initial training
course, which familiarizes her with all the important facets of the
community in which she lives.
I am here due to my league's commitment, interest and involvement
in Hubbard House, which is the name of Jacksonville's shelter for
physically abused women and sexually abused children.
My testimony is based on my direct involvement with Hubbard
House as a volunteer and a board member and is coupled with 16 years
of volunteer service within the community.
The FBI reports indicate that there are three times more incidents
of wife abuse reported than rape, and there is a rape reported every 3
minutes.
According to Jacksonville. Fla.. sheriff's department~. 50 to 60 per-
cent of all police calls are in response to family quarrels. Complaints
about police indifference abound, but we have to concede some justi-
fication because on a national level the FBI reports that one-fourth of
all police killed in 1974 were trying to break up family fights.
Prior to my becoming invlovecl with Hubbard House. I did volunteer
work for legal aid. My job was to interview prospective clients seeking
dissolution and to see if they qualified for legal aid's services. I be-
came very clear during my 4 years of interviewing that spouse abuse
was for our community a definite reality.
Not only did I hear testimony .to physical abuse, I was on numer-
ous occasions witness to the results of it. I would estimate that out of
the 900 women I interviewed, 70 to 80 percent had experienced physical
abuse.
The first shelter for battered women in the TJnited States came into
being in 1974 in St. Paul, Minn. In inst 5 years. 200 other shelters have
con~e into existence and they are filled to overflowing.
Plans for Jacksonville's shelter were conceived early in 1975 by a
group of feminists who had the right combination of concern, dedica-
tion, and energy. This group of women was able to find "seed" money
from a private, local foundation and Hubbard House opened officially
PAGENO="0161"
155
~n May of 1976, making it the first shelter in the Southeast and the 14th
shelter in the United States.
No one could have perceived that the need for our shelter was as
great as it is. The tiny three-bedroom house was filled with women and
children needing refuge.
Hubbard House reached out to the heart of our community and it
responded. Money came from everywhere-clubs, churches, individ-
uals, and business. Money from the grassroots of our community and
iuoney that amount to, during our first year, $60,000.
During the first year of operation, Hubbard 1-louse sheltered 200
physically abused women and their 325 children. Information, referral,
and counseling was given to over 200 walk-ins and 2,000 hotline and
information calls were answered. The very first year, still in its in-
fancy, Hubbard House touched on the lives of 2,725 women.
It became obvious by the second year of operation that they simply
had to have moie room. The search was on and in time they found an
old rooming house that was in horrible condition but had the space
and location that made up for its imperfections.
The Junior League, well aware of the need for a larger facility, gave
us the down payment and once again the community rallied forth with
4he money for the needed renovations.
It was during that period that the staff and board of directors
agreed to try to keep our small facility as well. Since Hubbard House
began operating in 1976, it was painfully obvious that the children
of families suffering domestic violence were in need of a program de-
signed for them.
Statistically, we knew that the risks were extremely high that the.y
would grow up to be abusive and/or abused themselves. A proposal
was outlined and submitted to our downtown Rotary. Our project was
chosen and are now in the process o-f implementation.
The importance of the children's program in our growth and direc-
tion is truly monumental. Hubbard House and, in fact, many other
agencies, as well as all funding sources, have got to address the sub-
ject of prevention or be resolved to perpetuation of the problem. We
are positive that we need shelters and the statistics demand that we
need prevention.
Domestic violence is in all neighborhoods-yours, mine, and theirs.
The popular assumption that marital violence occurs more frequently
in the ghetto and among the lower-class families is clearly not true.
Studies in Fairfax County, Va. (one of the wealthiest countries in
the United States) compare with West 1-larlem, and Norwalk, Conn.,
in that the population as well as the domestic violence are the same.
The Jacksonville police offense reports on spouse abuse clearly show
that the calls they receive are equally distributed among our city to
the north, east, south, and west areas.
Many would be surprised to learn that the average woman in Jack-
sonville who utilizes our shelter is white, 29 years old, has two chil-
dren, has been married 6 years, and has a family income of $13,000 a
year.
From January to June 1979, 1-lubbard House has served 235 women,
:349 children, 14 wife beaters, 192. walk-ins, and answered 2,650 hotline
and information calls. With 6 months left in the year, we have assisted,
in varying degrees, 3,439 women and children.
PAGENO="0162"
156
Traditionally, programs for women have been underfunded. Hub-~
bard 1-house operates on one-fourth of the budget of some agencies we-
know oi, while serving three times the number of people. Our funding
sources must improve if we are to stay in operation. and they must
improve considerably if we are to move in the area of prevention.
At present, Hubbard 1-house is dependent on the seven following
funding sources: United Way, LEAA, CETA, State, community do-
nations, foundations, and resident house fees.
Our State money is rather unique in that $5 has been added to the
cost of marriage licenses in Florida and this added money, in turn, will
be allocated to the shelters in the State. Stipulations are attached to
this money in that you must have an existing shelter and $25,000 in
matching fuiids. The maximum mone given to any one shelter will
not exceed $50,000. This innovative piece of legislation was brought
into being by Senators Ken Plant and Betty Castor in 1918.
In closing, I would like to share with you an incident that took place
last week. I was working at Hubbard House when Ned, a- 14-year-old
boy with cerebral palsy, decided to sit down and talk a while. He asked
me, in his slow, labored speech, if I were married. I told him I was, and'
asked him if he were married.
He grinned for a moment, but then his expression changed and in
the gravest of manner possible, he said: "Marriage is not good for your'
life." Let me repeat this, "marriage is not good for your life." What a
pathetic sight lie was-thin, pale, his arms hooked over and his legs
bent and twisted.
I thought for a moment of telling him that some marriages were not.
violent. But something in his expression and even in his tone told me
the subject for him was closed.
Ned's 7-year-old brother, David, caine in counting aloud. He askech
if I could count to 100. I said that I could. He was pleased that I could'
count, I think, for he asked me which numbers were larger, 100 oi~
1,000, and several other questions pertaining to counting. At one point,.
Dave's little forehead wrenched into a frown and lie asked, "Do num-
bers never end?"
David's mother called for both boys just then, and as lie left the rooni
with Ned struggling after him, I wondered, do numbers of abuse vic-
tims ever end? How far do we count before the numbers end?
Thank you.
Mr. SUI0N. Thank you for your excellent testimony.
Now, Dr. Kinsey Green, executive director of the American Home-
Economics Association.
[Prepared statement of Dr. Green follows:]
STATEMENT ON FAMILY VIOLENCE BY DR. KINSEY GREEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
AMERICAN HOME ECONOMICs ASSOCIATION, ON BEHALF OF THE COALITION 0F
FAMILY ORGANIZATIONS
Mr. Chairman and members of the Select Education Subcommittee. My name
is Kinsey Green, and I am the Executive Director of the American Home Eco-
nomics Association. I appreciate this opportunity to appear before your Subeom--
mittee to speak in support of H.R. 2977, the Domestic Violence Prevention and
Services Act because this legislation reflects growing national attention to the
widespread and serious problem of violence in American families.
This mornIng I speak not only for my own organization, but as a representative
of a Coalition of Family Organizations, composed of the American Association
of Marriage and Family Therapy, the Family Service Association of America~
the National Council on Family Relations, and the American Home Economics
PAGENO="0163"
157
Association. The Coalition was formed two years ago, and combines a member~
ship of over 75,000 persons who are educators in colleges and secondary school.
programs, social service providers, researchers, family counselors, agents in the
Cooperative Extension Service, and members of the business community. As
advocates working with families, we are well aware that American families are
undergoing dramatic changes and that many new strains and pressures are being
placed on families in this country. Although violence in families is not a new
situation, and historically is well documented, the growing public attention and
understanding about the extent of violence in families may encourage a larger
commitment to support service programs that will enable families to function
well. The Coalition believes that the assault of one individual family member
upon another is more than a private family problem, but rather is symptomatic
of a larger and deeper problem of family dysfunction which often creates a cycle
of violent family behavior that can be transmitted from one generation to the
next and have serious consequences for society.
The Coalition supports the efforts of the co-sponsors of H.R. 2977 to encourage
the federal government to play a larger leadership role in funding emergency
services to victims of family violence. However, even as we are prepared to
commit the substantial resources of our organizations to seek enactment of this
federal program, at the same time, we wish to call attention to sections of the bill
that we think need further explanation and clarification.
The legislation is titled the "Domestic Violence Prevention and Services Act,"
but the scope of the bill encompasses only one manifestation of family violence,
i.e., spouse abuse and principally assault against women. It is important to bear
in mind that family violence covers the entire age spectrum from child abuse, to
sibling violence, abuse of the elderly, as well as spouse abuse. The legislation is
more narrow in scope than the actual pattern of violence behavior among family
members.
The title of the bill also addresses two separate program needs-prevention
and services. However, the legislative language places the emphasis upon the
funding of direct services to abused women, with only a passing nod to preven-
tion. We agree that mechanisms for reducing family violence must include short
term crisis-oriented intervention, such as emergency shelter services, a 24-hour
hot line, regional directories where individual communities can obtain informa-
tion on shelters and support groups, family counseling and therapy. But unless
we are prepared to institutionalize the shelter system as the primary way of
reducing family violence, then we must begin to examine and develop long range
preventive human services programs. We must begin to consider not only the
immediate needs of women and children as victims of violence, but also consider
the effects on all members who live in violent homes. When we focus on child
abuse or wife beating, the remedies tend to be emergency measures which are
only temporary solutions. Emergency measures do not provide a positive alterna-
tive environment or change violent family interaction. We do not suggest aban-
doning these measures, but rather we must place them in a perspective-one
remedy within a context of other services to prevent the initial act and/or
repeated acts of violence.
In the section of the bill titled "Findings and Purposes," we would like to
expand the purposes to include a clear statement that assures services to the
abused person's family, including the victim's spouse, in instances where the
battered spouse wishes to return to the family and preserve the family relation-
ship. On page 5, line 4, we suggest that the language be modified to read ". . . to
assist victims and dependents of victims of domestic violence and to provide
access to counseling and therapy services when the victim indicates a prefer-
ence to return to his or her family."
A further point that we would like to call to your attention. In the section
of definitions, the phrase "domestic violence" is too narrow-ly defined and again
overlooks the scope and intensity of the problem. For example, the age designa-
tion of 18 years or older" places adolescent parents who are often 18 years or
younger outside of the boundaries of the legislation. A possil)le modification of
the definition could read "Family violence includes all physical or sexual as-
saults between family members or persons who live together, or persons who
have a close personal relationship. Assault is the threat or actual act of physical
or sexual abuse."
There are other provisions of the legislation that we think should receive
more emphasis and attention. The media campaign to heighten public aware-
ness is one such example. Over the past 4 or 5 years, although there has been
PAGENO="0164"
158
.a spate of newspaper and magazine articles, television reports and documen-
taries about spouse abuse, there is still substantial public apathy that needs to
be overcome. The ground work for better community understanding of the prob-
1cm and perhaps eventually for the support of programs for victims and of-
fenders, can be laid through educational programs which define the problem,
explain the possible contributing factors, and challenge the popularly held myths
~about wife abuse and family violence in general.
The Cooperative Extension Service, through such land grant institutions as
Purdue, Cornell, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, and Oklahoma State University,
have organized and sponsored panel discussions, educational programs on fam-
ily violence, and community forums that have helped fill the gap in public in-
formation and understanding. A description of some of the work of extension
service agents at Purdue University will help explain ways in which the exten-
sion service uses its county and State networks to train a core group of service
providers who work with families, and how those trainees can have a larger
ripple effect throughout the state.
Two years ago, the extension service began a training program for about 20
agents who serve the same number of counties in Indiana. Training sessions
were developed to discuss the nature of family violence, some misconceptions,
especially about wife abuse, and an enumeration of currently available referral
services in the counties for families in crisis. Another facet of the discussion
focused on the need for many existing service agencies to change and become
sensitive to signs of violence in families and the effects upon family members.
Last February, the cooperative extension service together with the Depart-
ment of Child Development and Family Studies at Purdue conducted a 2-day
symposium on family violence, including workshops on child abuse and wife
abuse. About 300 people participated: social workers, extension agents, nursery
school personnel, and members of the general public.
Last May, the Extension trained about 60 CAP outreach workers at a weekend
conference on family violence. Finally, each year, the extension service hold a
homemaker's conference, with an audience of about 500 homemakers; last year,
the subject was family violence and ways for citizens to become involved and
help.
Another example of public education is AHEA, together with the other Coali-
tion organizations, embarking upon a pilot project funded by the Law Enforce-
ment Assistance Administration, to test the effects of a large scale media
campaign on a local family service systems and the response capability of these
systems. Three cities will be the test sites: Santa Barbara, Calif.; Fayetteville,
NC., and Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minn.
On page 7, line 18, there is a provision which states ". . . any project for which
.a grant is made will be administered and operated by personnel with appropriate
skills . . ." The coalition believes that this provision has particular significance
because some service providers who have the first contact with a family member
in crisis may not always be skilled enough to understand the group dynamics
in family violence, and may not be able to assess in a realistic manner the p~y-
chological or emotional distress of an individual who has been abused. The
American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy has designed and con-
*Tucted training programs for other professionals, and has worked with older
women to train them as counselors for shelter programs.
In Pawtucket, 11.1., the Family Service Association, together with the local
police department has developed an interdisciplinary team approach to families
in crisis, where a member of the police force and a counselor with knowledge and
training in public assistance, child welfare and/or mental health programs work
in teams. In some cases, bi-lingual counselors have been called in to work in
neighborhoods with a high concentration of Hispanic population. The teams are
available during the day and in the evenings and work out of the police stations.
Often they will make the initial contact with a family in need of assistance and
can follow-up with four or five return visits. Outside consultants from other
community agencies ride with team members on a regularly scheduled basis,
while the teams are on duty, and have an opportunity to discuss a situation
~immediately following the intervention. Team members meet monthly with dif-
ferent consultants, including representatives from runaway shelters, protective
~services, women's centers, community alcohol and drug programs, and local com-
munity mental health agencies. At least 15 of the FSAA agencies are helping to
develop these community services networks.
PAGENO="0165"
159
* One further long term effort in prevention should include family life education
as an integral part of the K-12 school curriculum. As early as the kindergarten
years. young children begin to develop a concept of self-worth and self-esteem,
and a sense of the roles they will play as adults. We need to teach children that
there are shared responsibilities for boys and girls as they prepare for the major
roles that almost all adults will fill-parent, spouse and wage earner. Role expec-
tation is a very important aspect of family life education. Another includes
problem solving skills and handling of resources-financial, physical, emotional
and intellectual-with an emphasis upon developing these skills without resorting
to violent behavior. For adolescents and young adults, family life education in-
cludes concepts of parenting and child development; this program has proved to
be an effective means for reducing and preventing child abuse.
Finally, the coalition recommends that the legislation address the need for
family-based research and develop coordinating mechanisms to utilize and build
upon existing research efforts about families and the impact of violent behavior
on families. Let me offer one illustration of the kinds of gaps that exist in cur-
rent data about families. There is little existing data that accurately describes
the numbers of abused women who return to a violent family situation, why they
return, what services they need or want, and what kind of further abuse they
are subjected to once they return home. We need more long term basic research
and evaluative research to monitor the problem of family violence as well as the
success of existing programs. Without more of this data, we cannot adequately
develop the services and support systems that families need to function in a
manner that will provide safety for their members.
The coalition will continue to work with you toward the enactment of this
important piece of legislation. Thank you again for this opportunity to present
the interests of the coalition. I will be glad to answer any questions that you
might have.
STATEMENT OP KINSEY GREEN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
AMERICAN HOME ECONOMICS ASSOCIATION
Ms. GREEN. Mr. Chairman, and members of the Select Education
Subcommittee. I am Kinsey Green, and I am the executive director of
the American 1-lome. Economics Association. I appreciate the oppor-
tunity to appear this morning, and appreciate your leadership in
addressing u-hat our association and others like us believe to be a
significant problem.
I speak not only, this morning, for my own organization, but as a
representative of the Coalition of Family Organizations, composed of
the American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy, the Fam-
ily Service Association of America, the National Council on Family
Rd ati ons~ and the American Home Economics Association.
This coalition was formed 2 years ago, and combines a membership
of over 75.000 professionals and volunteers who are educators in col-
lege and university programs, secondary and elementary schools, post-
secondary programs, social service providers, researchers. family coun-
selors, agents in the Cooperative Extension Service, and members of
the. business community.
The members of these four associations literally reach millions of
families on a day-to-day basis. As advocates working with families,
we are well aware that American families are undergoing dramatic
chanires and that many new strains and pressures being placed upon
families are frequently attributed as causes for domestic violence.
The coalition supports the efForts of the cosponsors of this bill to
encourage the Federal Government. to ~ia~r a larger leadership role
in funding emergency services to victims of family violence. Specifi-
caliy~ we support the Federal role as cat alvst, the role of the Federal
Government as role model for States and for community governments,
PAGENO="0166"
160
the attention to public awareness campaigns, and the concern for
services as crisis intervention.
We do, however, request the following amendments, or make the
following recommendations:
(1) That the definition of the scope of family violence be broadened
beyond that of spouse abuse with particular attention to abused women,
because we are aware from some data conducted by our professionals
that the extent of violence not only against children, but against the
elderly, sibling violence against other siblings, and violence against
the handicapped are also problems in American families. So we would
urge your attention to a broader definition of domestic violence.
(2) We would also call your attention to the fact that while the
bill is entitled "Prevention and Services," the bulk of the content of
the bill talks about crisis intervention, or services treatment to the
abused. We would urge more concentration on prevention through
family life education, through resource provision, because we do have
a data base that shows that physical and financial stress are causative
factors. We urge support for families, including respite care for the
vulnerable and dependent, and day care.
(3) The prevention aspect of the bill pay more attention to family
research, that we might have an adequate data base, particularly
relating to the causes and solution of a variety of populations, includ-
ing abuse against the elderly and handicapped.
The members of our four associations represent the creation of
model programs, they represent research, they represent a variety of
services and preventive programs in this arena.
We would urge that the definition of parents as being 18 years or
older is not sufficient. That does not encompass a number of adoles-
cent parents in this country, who are beneath the age of 18, and in
whom we are finding a substantial incidence of violence in the home.
The media campaign to heighten public awareness is another con-
cern. That is a laudable approach. The American Home Economics
Association is now involved with LEAA in a contract to conduct such
a public awareness campaign. We quickly found out, however, that a
public awareness campaign which urges people to report to various
kinds of services-counseling, therapy, educational programs-which,
in fact, do not exist is not a service to the people.
So our contract has taken a different mode in that our first attempt
will be to ascertain in four principal cities in the United States exactly
what programs and services do exist for victims of family violence.
Why call the public's attention and urge them to seek help, if no such
programs and services exist, or if, indeed, they are limited.
The Cooperative Extension Service, through such land grant insti-
tutions as Purdue, Cornell, Virginia Polytechnic Institute, and Okla-
homa State University, have organized and sponsored panel discus-
sions, educational programs on family violence, and community fo-
rums that have helped fill the gap in public information and under-
standing.
The Cooperative Extension Service represents a network in every
community in this country that could be of service in educational
programs, family life education, child development resource manage-
ment, to help allay the causes of family violence.
PAGENO="0167"
161
In many States, the Cooperative Extension Service has presented
extensive programs to train their counselors to work with families
where abuse has taken place.
The coalition believes that the provision for "personnel with appro-
priate skills" to man the centers and the clearinghouses has particular
significance because some service providers who have the first contact
with family menThers in crisis may not always be skilled enough to
understand the group dynamics in family violence, and may not be
able to assess the psychological and emotional distress of an individual
who has been abused.
The American Association of Marriage and Family Therapy has
designed and conducted training programs for other professionals,
and has particularly worked with older women to train them as peer
counselors.
In Rhode Island, the Family Services Association together with the
local police department has developed an interdisciplinary team ap-
proach to families in crisis, where a member of the police force and
the counselor with knowledge and training in public assistance, child
welfare and/or mental health programs work in teams.
In some cases, bilingual counselors have been trained to work in
neighborhoods with a high concentration of Hispanic population.
Finally, the coalition does recommend that legislation address the
need for family based research and develop coordinating mechanisms
to utilize and build upon existing research efforts about families, and
the impact of violent behavior on families.
We are concerned that the entire family structure have that support
s~stem, and not just the abused individual or, as the bill implies, the
victims and dependents of the victims.
One long-term effort in prevei~tion should include family life educa-
tion as an integral part of the K through 12 school curriculum. As
early as the kindergarten years, young children begin to develop a con-
cept of self-worth and self-esteem, and a sense of the roles that they
~vill play as adults. We need to teach children that there are shared
responsibilities for time home and for the family, as they prepare for
~the major roles that all adults fill, that of worker, pamemit, spouse, com-
munity participaimt.
Role expectation is an important aspect of family life edtication.
Another important aspect is the provision and management of re-
sources-financial, physical, emotional, intellectual-these would seem
very closely to relate to the data base we already have on the causes of
Tfamily violence.
The coalition will continue to work with you toward the enactment
~f this important piece of legislation. We are supportive of the services
aspect and of the. delineation of the role of the Federal Government as
catalyst. We would urge your attention, in summary, to broadening the
scope of family violence beyond that of spouse abuse, to emphasize
prevention vis-a-vis treatment and crisis intervention, and to a broader
research base on the causes and solutions.
Thank you.
Mr. SnI0N. Thank you very much, Dr. Green. We appreciate also
your very specific suggestions for modification.
I might mention here that we intend to mark-up shortly after the
Labor Day recess, so any others who have any specific suggestions along
PAGENO="0168"
162
this line, for possible amendment of the bill as it now exists, that will
be appreciated. It is the kind of practical testimony that we need.
Ms. Campbell, you talk about Cuyhoga County, 27,000. Is that an
annual figure, or what is that?
Ms. CAMPBELL. It is an annual figure.
Mr. SIMoN. Ms. Olson, I was interested. You mentioned working with.
the children, and you used the family situation. How do you do that ?
The concept, I like, but I don't understand what is happening.
Ms. OLSON. There are some primary things that need to be done with
the children, especially they need to have some male models to identify
with, who are not. in effect, abusive. We hope to have that afforded in
these children's program.
We want to have a day care center, too. We are applying for a license
for the program, so that possibly we can hold onto these children a little
longer than the 3 to 5 weeks that we normally would have them..
lYe want to counsel them using play therapy. The children have, even
to an untrained observer, definite emotional problems. You could walk
into any shelter, and within a few minutes you would know tha.t there
is stress and a great deal of trouble inside of these youngsters.
Mr. SI~roN. Are you a volunteer, or are you full-time?
Ms. OLSON. I am a volunteer through the Junior League at Hub-
bard House, and also a hoard member.
Did I answer your question?
Mr. SI~roN. Yes; you did. Thank you.
Mr. Coleman?
Mr. COLEMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to thank~ the ladies who, obviously, have a great deal of
interest in voluntarism.
Let me ask you a question. Ms. Campbell. I understand the city of
Cleveland has financial problems, and is not contributing any funds
to the program.
Ms. CAMPBELL. They city is contributing funds through the com-
munity development bloc grant for the renovation of the shelter facil-
ity itself. There is one public service employee from the city of
Cleveland's CETA consortium.
Mr. COLEMAN. I note that the authorization in the legislation. as
it is presently written, is $15 million for the first year, a.nd according to
the formula, if it is divided by 50, we are not going to have a whole
lot of money for every State. In fact, it will be $300,000 per State for
the first year. Is that going to be any significant contribution toward
solving any of the problems that you have related today in your
States?
Ms. OLSON. Yes; I think it will. I think the criteria should be that the
shelters should be in existence. I think that they need to illustrate
that there has been need in the community for them, and that they do
have grassroots support for them.
A shelter, if there is a need, can establish itself. lYe are at the point
now, in Jacksonville. and I am sure in Cleveland, where when you hit
that third year, you have just about used up your sources at the local
level, and you have to reach out for Federal or State money.
Mr. COLEMAN. I am interested in your Florida law of $5 added to
the marriage license. Is that a model, or is that unique?
PAGENO="0169"
163
Ms. CAMPBELL. It is pending in Ohio right now, with a $10 charge.
It has passed the Senate, and it is being considered by the House.
Mr. COLEMAN. 1-low much revenue do they anticipate in Florida?
Ms. OLSON. Overall, I could not tell you, but our shelter alone, this
year, we are looking at $20,000 coming in.
Mr. COLEMAN. What percentage of your operation is that?
Ms. OLSON. `We really have not gotten the revenue yet, so I cannot
answer that very accurately for you. But I do wish it could go up to
$100 because I don't understand why marriage should be so much
cheaper than divorce. [Laughter.]
Mr. COLEMAN. A fee could be tagged on to the petition for divorce,
and you might get $20 on that.
Ms. OLSON. That is a possibility, too.
Mr. COLEMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SI~rON. Mr. 1-lawkins?
Mr. HAWKINS. Mr. Chairman, I apologize because I did not hear
the witnesses, but may I ask a general question, and see which of the
witnesses may care to answer.
Is there any correlation between domestic violence and the economic
conditions? Is there any fluctuation depending on, let us say, the rate
of unemployment?
Ms. OLSON. `We do find that domestic violence exists in all economic
-areas. It really does.
Dr. Green might want to add to that.
Ms. GREEN. `\`Ve do know that the incidence of child abuse and spouse
abuse increases as unemployment increases, and as general economic
times are tougher~ `We have some very significant case records, one
being from Flint, Mich., for example. That is the question that I was
getting at when I talked about resources for families-employment,
financial resources, and respite care and day care, which will help
relieve the financial, emotional, and physical stress that we know to be
.a causative factor in family violence.
Mr. HAWKINS. Are you familiar with the study on Cook County,
with due apologies to the chairman of tile subcommittee, linking child
abuse rather directly with economic conditions, particulariy with the
rise and fall of unemployment?
Ms. GREEN. Yes, sir.
Mr. HAWKINS. Do you generally agree with tile findings of that Cook
County study?
Ms. GREEN. Weli, there is some contradictory evidence, but I believe
that tile testimony presented on the full employment bill was pretty
impressive about the connection between the financial stress in tile
home and the striking, lashing out at the more vulnerable and de-
pendent members in that relationship.
Mr. HAWKINS. Thank you.
Mr. SIMON. Did you get the answer you wanted?
Mr. HAWKINS. I am a strong supporter of the bill, but it is not
enough to deal with the effects, without at tile same time dealing with
the causes. The bill itself, I think, is very supportive in ideas, but at tile
-same time, it seems to me, we have to also deal with tile basic causes
~of domestic vioience. Unless we do that, the rest is just patchwork.
PAGENO="0170"
164
Ms. GREEN. This is really a services bill. It is not a prevention bill,
I believe.
Mr. HAWKINS. Until we get around to the sanity of trying to deal
with economic policies in the broad aspect.
Thank you.
Ms. CAMPBELL. May I add something, Mr. Hawkins?
Mr. SIMON. Yes.
Ms. CAMPBELL. The other thing, in terms of the prevention aspect
and the causes, it is important to look at the historical role of women
in this family. If you look at the law that we operate with, it comes
from the British common law where women were considered the
property of their husbands. That kind of background is the frame-
work in which the marriage and family relationships still exist.
There is a great problem, we found, when we sat and reviewed the
laws of the State of Ohio, actual operation and procedure in the
court and the treatment by the judges and the prosecutors, too often
there was a tacit acceptance of abuse against women as appropriate
behavior for husbands.
I think that the economic conditions are indeed important, but also
the recognition of women as whole people is an essential step toward
preventing this kind of violence.
Mr. SI~IoN. Mr. Erdahl?
Mr. ERDAHL. I don't have any questions. I just want to thank the
panel for the testimony, and what I did not hear, I will read. Thank
you.
Mr. SnI0N. Mr. Miller?
Mr. MILLER. Thank you. I also want to apologize for not being here
earlier. I was testifying over in the Senate. I wanted to thank the
panel for their testimony because I honestly believe that the success
or failure of this legislation is going to depend upon a very united
group of supporters in a `broad range of social activities in this
country.
I think the fact that the National Council of Churches, the Junior
League, the American Home Economics Association, and the Women's
Clubs, are here shows that the legislation is supported by people who
are concerned about maintaining the family.
Those who want to criticize this as some kind of massive Federal
intervention really do not understand what is happening, really,
because by the time that the process that we are talking about attend-
ing to, the physical battering of the members of that family, is taking
place.
The question is, how do you support these individuals to get their
lives back together? I think that with groups such as yours, we can
do it. The Junior League has taken this on as part of their national
projects this year, which I think is going to `be very helpful, just as
their support in foster care over the last couple of years was.
So I am delighted to have you come and testify because there are
some Members of Congress who think that `this is some kind of radical
approach to family policy.
I agree with your statements. I hope some day, when we show evi-
dence here that we are able to put families back t.ogther, and we. are
able to put individuals back together and sometimes back into the
family setting from which they fled.
PAGENO="0171"
165
We now see in a project in California where, probably the most
heinous of crimes, incest, 80 percent of those people return to their
family with long-term counseling, but they are back as a unit. The
mother has not fled out of guilt. The father is not in jail. The daughter
is not emotionally disturbed. They are back together, and they ar~
working on their problems.
Maybe some day we will have family resource centers that are open
2~ hours a day, where people who are supposed to be. delivering the
services are not in the building from 8 to 5, and families who need
support, not intervention, caii. go and seek help.
Maybe some day, when the cumulative evidence is in on these
kinds of centers, and other volunteer programs that support faniilies
a.fter the sun goes down and before the sun comes up in the morning,
then we will see a system of family resource centers in middle-size
communities across this country with volunteers and bureaucrats, and
others working together to try to hold toget.her.
Right now it is very clear that the family is splitting apart at the
middle, from the children to the grandparents, to everybody involved.
So I think that your testimony is going to be very helpful as we
mark up this bill, and as we make our case to the full Congress.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Sn~iox. Mr. Stack?
Mr. STACK. I, too, would like to commend the witnesses in par-
ticular for their emphasis on prevention. It means that we really have
to give very hard consideration to causes. Obviously, one cannot get
to prevention unless one gets to the causes.
The causes of the problem that we are dealing with are very com-
plex, obviously, they are deep -seated psychologically. Long-range
prevention means that we have to try to underst.and people, and the
structure of the family, individuals, more accurately than we have
done in the past. I think that this bill is leading us in the right
direction.
Mr. Hawkins' question as to the effect of the economic status as a
causative factor is a point that we certainly wish to consider. With-
out any question, it is a factor.
One of the things that I have found, and I might point out that
I was in law enforcement for many ye.ars before I came to the Con-
gress, the abuse of alcohol a.nd other drugs can be prevented, and to
the extent that we are successful with prevention of the abuse. of
alcohol and drugs, we. may strike a blow for liberty in this area that
we are considering today. These are very closely related.
I worked for many years in drug and alcohol rehabilitation pro-
grams, and none of these problems offered simple solutions. But I do
think that overall, what you ladies have suggested is that we should
broaden our scope. We have to think in terms of child abuse, in par-.
ticular. This is a devasting crime. As we all know, the abused child
grows up to be a child abuser. We have to break this chain in some
fashion or other.
The abuse of the elderly by young people, as you pointed out, and
the abuse of the handicapped, all of these things are matters of deep
concern.
I would like to suggest a.nd I thought of this as a result of some-
thing that Mr. Miller said, speaking of whether or not we have social
PAGENO="0172"
166
service agencies available on a 24-hours a day basis, I would like to
suggest that you go back to your communities and embrace the idea
that the police department, if properly trained should be a 24-hour
a day social service agency.
The function of the police should go nnich beyond, let us say, mak-
ing arrests. I know I defined my role, as the sheriff of Broward
County, a county of a million people, as a full-time social worker.
That is the way that I considered myself.
I do think we should try to impress t.his on social consciousness. A
police officer should be trained properly to deal with all these aspects
of domestic violence. That is the way that I trained my own men, my
deputies. I sought help from other areas, from the city of New York,
and I brought them down to train my men. This is something that
we get into. This is the practical way to go.
I do think that this bill is something that we desperately need as
indication of national support of what has to be one of our most
massive, complicated social problems. It is a token in a sense, but
it does focus, I hope, national attention on this. When we get into
mark-up, perhaps we can get more specifically into causes.
I do commend the ladies for coming to us, and I find their testimony
very interesting, indeed.
Thank you. Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Si~iox. We thank you for coming here. and our testimony.
Before we take the next witnesses. we have a roll call on the floor.
We will take a 10-minute recess, and resume at that point. [Recess.]
Mr. MILLER. The committee will reconvene for the purpose of hearing
witnesses from the administration, specifically~ Sam Brown. the Di-
rector of Action; Bia.nclina Ca.rdenas Ramirez, Commissioner, Adinin-
istration for Children, Youth and Families of the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare; J. Robert Grimes, Administrator,
Office of Criminal Justice Programs, Law Enforcement Assistance
Administration.
We will take the witnesses, with Ms. Ramirez going first, and Sa~n
Brown, a.nd then Robert Grimes.
STATEMENT OF BLANDINA CARDENAS RAMIREZ, COMMISSIONER,
ADMINISTRATION FOR CHILDREN, YOUTH AND FAMILIES, DE-
PARTMENT OP HEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE ACCOM-
PANIED BY TUNE ZEITLIN, OFFICE OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Ms. RA~rIREz. Mr. Chairman. and members of the subcommittee. I am
Blandina Ca.rdenas Ramirez. Commissioner of the Administration for
Children, Youth, andi Families. in the Office of Human Development
Services. Accompanying me this morning is June Zeitlin, Acting
Director of the Office of Domestic Violence.
I appreciate the opportunity to testify on the Department's con-
tinuing concern about the problem of domestic violence and to provide
you with an up-date on activities that have, occurred since the subcom-
mittee hearings last year. I would like to summarize my testimony and
insert the full statement in the record. When I testified last year,
we were aware that domestic violence was a serious problem, affecting
an unknown nunTher of families, causing suffering and hardship. par-
ticularly to women and their children.
PAGENO="0173"
167
Across the country, the victims of spouse abuse have come forward
with specific information about their plight and, in response to their
needs, voluntary local groups and human services agencies, both pri-.
vate and public, have put together programs to respond to these needs.
Individual communities have recognized the problem and, in a variety
of ways, sought solutions. Domestic violence has received national at-
tention because individuals, women's groups, and other community
organizations have asked the Congress and the Federal Government
for help.
In BlEW during this past year, we have increased our understand-
ing of the dimensions of domestic violence, begun to focus the work
of the agency whose missions and resources can appropriately be re-
late.d to treating the problems, and taken the first steps in coordinating
our own activities.
Domestic violence is a serious problem. The data which have been
presented to you in these two days hearings related to the magnitude
of the problem are those which reflect our own knowledge of the
problem.
Since our testimony last year, several steps have been taken at the
direction of the President and Secretary Califano that will enable
the Federal Government to begin to appraise and address the problem
of domestic violence.
As a first step, Secretary Califano has established an Office on
Domestic Violence within my office, ACYF. We do not see the creation
of an Office on Domestic Violence as an alternative to services. We are
continuing to examine the legislative, options available to us, including
the bills pending before this subcommittee, that would enable us to
provide the broad range of services needed. In the meantime, however,
the office is serving as the Department's "eyes and ~ and we hope
conscience, on activities related to domestic violence. This office will-
provide a central focus for policy planning;
keep track of current developments in service delivery, research,
and evaluation of domestic violence projects, and coordinate these
activities;
heln to develop a Department-wide research and evaluation
agenda;
serve as a focal point for information both within the Depart-
ment end for other Federal agencies and outside groups;
assist other 1-IEW agencies to improve services to victims of
domestic violence;
develop, collect, and disseminate information on domestic vio-
lenc.e, and. I might add, on ways in which communities can respond
to domestic violence.
work with other Federal agencies t.o develop joint programs and
activities;
provide the staff support for the Interdepartmental Committee
on Domestic Violence
The office has been in operation for only a month, yet in that short
time we have received requests for information on domestic violence,
particularly on funding sources, from groups and individuals in almost
one-half of the States. The office is already receiving approximately
50 inquiries per week.
For fiscal year 1980, the office will have more than $1 million avail-
able in funds for programs and activities on domestic violence.
49-914-79-----i2
PAGENO="0174"
168
The office staff has already begun to consult widely about next year's
programs with community and provider groups, members of the inter-
departmental committee, and others interested and experienced in the
field.
As several of you have suggested, the first major activity that the
office is undertaking is the development of a National Clearinghouse
on Domestic Violence. Working with an already existing clearing-
house operation, the Office on Domestic Violence plans to become the
single, comprehensive source of information in the Federal Govern-
ment. We are working closely with related programs at the Depart-
ment of Justice, and the National Institute of Mental Health in this
effort. Specifically, the new office is working closely with the Law
Enforcement Assistance Administration and their grantee, the Center
for Women's Policy Studies, to develop and disseminate information
on the availability of resources, on organizing and implementing do-
mestic violence programs, and on strategies for coordinating criminal
justice, community development, and social service activities at the
local level.
We recognize that domestic violence is a problem that requires
responsiveness from the criminal justice, health, shelter, and social
services systems. We hope that through these joint efforts we will be
able to capitalize on existing resources, and avoid unnecessary du-
plication.
Domestic violence requires a coordinated response from these many
Federal agencies. Mechanisms are needed to link the various Federal,
State, and local programs together in a way that is meaningful and
helpful for victims of domestic violence.
This spring, the President asked Secretary Califano to organize
and chair an Interdepartmental Committee on Domestic Violence
composed of representatives of 10 Federal departments and agencies.
These include: ACTION, the Commission on Civil Rights, the Com-
munity Services Administration, and the Departments of Agriculture,
Defense, Housing and Urban Development, Justice, Labor, and
Interior.
The committee was asked to coordinate a review of Federal pro-
grams which currently provide or could provide assistance to victims
of domestic violence. As part of that review, we will examine Federal
agency and program policies whicli may hinder the development of
domestic violence programs, and submit recommendations to the Presi-
dent to strengthen the Federal, State, and local government response
to this problem.
The interdepartmental committee will serve as a forum for this
task. The committee has begun to meet and will begin its work by-
identifying Federal agency programs and policies that relate
to services for victims of domestic violence and compiling these
into a Federal resource handbook for domestic violence pro-
grams;
assisting State and local agencies to identify programs that
could serve victims of domestic violence;
facilitating joint Federal and State agency activities including
research, demonstration programs, and public information
activities;
PAGENO="0175"
169
exchanging information about ongoing and planned activities
within the Federal Government.
This review will enable us to determine the capability of the Federal
Government to respond to domestic violence problems, to make rec-
ommendations to the President, and to take the necessary steps, where
possible, to enhance Federal, State, and local responsiveness to the
problem.
In fiscal year 1979, HEW will spend about $1.1 million for research
and demonstration projects on domestic violence. Examples of these
projects include:
-A project by the National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alco-
holism which has funded research on the interaction between alcohol
and violence, and their effect on the family.
The National Institute of Mental Health has funded a survey to
determine the extent of violence in American families. This survey has
given us the most accurate estimates we have on spouse abuse, child
abuse, and sibling abuse.
NIMH has also funded two studies to identify the possible psycho-
logical determinants that may inhibit women from leaving a relation-
ship in which they are battered.
The Office of Human Development Services has funded a grant to
examine State and local "best practices," and to determine how those
best practices can be transferred from one program to another.
The National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect has been fund-
ing services in several demonstration programs to abused mothers,
as well as to their children. I might add that `the National Center on
Child Abuse and Neglect will be including questions about spouse
abuse as they evaluate the 71 demonstration programs that are cur-
rently in place.
HEW has again proposed an amendment to title XX of the Social
Security Act which will allow State social services agencies to provide
emergency shelter to adults as a protective service. As you know,
HEW proposed such an amendment during the last session `of Con-
gress; it was introduced by Representative George Miller, and passed
the House. However, no final action was taken by the Senate during
the last hectic days before adjournment. This amendment is included
in H.R. 3434, which was reported out of the Ways and Means Com-
mittee, and is awaiting floor action. This amendment would enable
the Departme.nt to support local efforts by encouraging States to
develop needed shelter services for battered women and families.
Currently, States are using title XX funds for a variety of services
for battered women, such as information and referral, counseling, and
child care. But title XX funds cannot be used to pay for emergency
shelter. Forty-nine States are using funds to provide protective serv-
ices to adults; 43 are providing counseling; 43 are providing employ-
ment services; and 43 are providing legal services to battered women.
As demonstrated by these activities and initiatives, the President
and the Secretary are committed to addressing the problem of domestic
violence. We are increasing our understanding of the multifaceci
problem, and developing the capability to transmit this information-
in terms of research, advice, and funding sources-to the field. We
are beginning throughout the Federal Government to make ourselves
PAGENO="0176"
170
more aware of the problem of domestic violence a.nd to coordinate the
response of our many programs.
Despite these significant steps, we are aware that in many areas
not all of the immediate services needed by battered women and their
families are available or accessible to them. The women in greatest
need are those who, forced to flee their homes, have no other place of
refuge, neither friends nor family, who can take them m and help
them through a particularly severe ordeal. These women need pro-
tection, emergency medical careS temporary shelter, and the oppor-
tunity to remove themselves a.nd, in some cases, their children from
the violent situation.
They also need followup services which will enable them either to
set up safe independent households for themselves and their children,
or to return to their homes with some measure of protection.
These followup services include health care. legal services, housing
or housing referral and information, income maintenance for the pro-
vision of food, clothing, and shelter, child care, counseling for victims
and abusers, job training and placement. protection from further
abuse. and services designed to keep families together, where appro-
Tpriate.
While there are a number of Federal, State, and local programs
which are beginning to provide these services, there are three basic
problems: First, they are not available in every community. Second,
there are not adequate services available to the women who decide
to return. Third, they are often not responsive or accessible to the needs
of a frinhtened woman, perhaps with serious or painful injuries, who
has fled her home with her children in the middle of the night. and
has no money, no access to the family resources, and no place to go.
The real impetus fo,r meeting the needs of battered women in a
comprehensive manner has come from local communities. As you
know, the primary emphasis of this grassroots movement has been
the development of shelters for battered women. These shelters offer
protection from immediate danger, furnish information and referral
about resources available in the community, and provide other impor-
tant services.
Five years a~o. almost no emergency shelters for battered women
existed. Now there are 200 sh&ters. Shelters have been established
on a shoestring budget by the cooperative efforts of women's groups,
relupous oraanizations, comnmnity organizations such as the Salva-
tion Army or YWCA. public and private social service agencies, and
many dedicated individuals.
These shelters usually receive financial support from many sources.
They seldom obtain stable, long-range fundin~. While some funding is
received from the public sector, shelters receive the majority of their
supnort from private sources.
The distribution of shelters around the country is uneven. Even
whete~ shelters do exist, there are problems ivith funding, overcrowd-
and coordination with other community agencies.
We all recognize that shelters are not the solution to the problem
of domestic violence. They are necessary, important, provide com-
munitv-based supuort for victims, and more shelters are needed than
cu1~rently e~ists. But not all communities or all victims of domestic
PAGENO="0177"
171
violence may need or want shelters. Some communities are developing
alternatives.
We must move beyond shelters and crisis intervention centers ulti-
mately if we are to reduce the problem of domestic violence. Addi-
tional research on identifying the extent of, and solutions to, domestic
violence public awareness campaigns, and prevention measures are
also necessary ingredients of a program to address the root causes
of domestic violence.
Mr. Chairman, you and other members of the committee have pro-
posed legislation that addresses many of the issues of concern. We
deeply share your concerns and have taken steps to respond to some of
these needs. tet, we recognize that a portion of those needs, emergency
shelters, for example, are being met primarily at the local level with
little Federal support. We have already proposed an amendment to title
XX. We are currently examining legislative proposals, which permit
a mOre comprehensive response to this problem. Several principles we
are considering in developing such a response include:
1. A focus of prevention and obtaining access to a range of needed
services fo,r battered spouses, as well as providing the basic needed
service: emergency shelter;
2. The establishment of close linkages and access to the existing
service system, instead of creating a new one;
3. Continuation of the focus on community projects, while estab-
lishing incentives for State efforts which include improving access to
State-funded services, and reforms in State and local law enforcement
systems.
4. Fostering innovation and experimentation in order to learn and
utilize the most effective approaches.
In closing, let me reiterate that we share your concern for the vic-
tims of domestic violence and the needs they have. V\Te have been
exploring the best ways to assist them and hope that this year the
Congress will enact the emergency shelter amendment to title XX we
have proposed. We look forward to continue discussions with you and
to working together toward improving the quality of life for victims
of domestic yiolen'ce.
[Prepared statement of Blandina Ramirez follows:]
STATEMENT OF BLANDINA CARDENAS RAMIREZ, CoMMIssIoNER, ADMINISTRATION
FOR CHILDREN, YOUTH, AND FAMILIES, OFFICE OF HUMAN DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I am Blandina Carcienas
Ramirez, Commissioner of the Administration for Children, Youth, and Families.
in the Office of Human Development Services. Accompanying me this morning
is June Zeitlin, Acting Director of the Office on Domestic Violence.
I appreciate the opportunity to testify on the Department's continuing con-
cern about the problem of domestic violence and to provide you with an up-date
on activities that have occurred since Subcommittee hearings last year. When
I testified last year, we were aware that domestic violence was a serious problem,
affecting an unknown number of families, causing suffering and hardship, par-
ticularly to women and their children.
Across the country, the victims of spouse abuse have come forward with speci-
fic information about their plight and, in response to their needs, voluntary local
groups and human services agencies, both private and public, have put together
programs. Individual communities have recognized the problem and, in a variety
of ways, sought solutions. Domestic violence has received national attention
because individuals, women's groups, and other community organizations have
asked the Congress and the federal government for help.
PAGENO="0178"
172
In HEW during this past year we have increased our understanding of the
dimensions of domestic violence, begun to focus the work of the agencies whose
missions and resources can be appropriately related to treating the problem,
.and taken the first steps in co-ordinating our own activities.
THE PROBLEM
Domestic violence is a serious problem which adversely affects the lives of
millions of women, children and men.
Nationwide, the best estimates are that about 2 million women are victims of
domestic violence annually.
Assaults are seldom single or isolated incidents, but tend to increase in terms
of both frequency and intensity over time.
Domestic violence often leads to serious injury and may even lead to death-
in a Michigan survey, 85 percent of battered women required hospitalization for
injuries such as concussions, miscarriages, broken/cracked ribs and first-degree
burns.
Domestic violence cuts across all social, ethnic, racial and economic lines. It
is not confined to families in poverty or minority groups. It is a problem for all
economic and racial groups and is further complicated by geographic location
and isolation.
Data from the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect reporting system
indicate that spouse abuse was also observed to be present in about 20 percent
of child abuse cases.
Moreover, we still don't know the full extent of the problem, what causes
domestic violence, how to prevent its recurrence and how best to deliver the
services needed by the victims of domestic violence and their dependents.
Since our testimony last year, several steps have been taken at the direction of
the President and Secretary Califano that will enable the federal government to
begin to appraise and address the problem of domestic violence.
THE OFFICE ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
* As a first step, Secretary Califano has established an Office on Domestic Vio-
lence within my office, the Administration for Children, Youth, and Families.
The Administration does not see the creation of the Office on Domestic Violence
as an alternative to services. We are continuing to examine the legislative op-
tions, including the bills pending before this Subcommittee, that would enable us
to provide the broad range of services needed. In the meantime, the Office is
serving as the Department's "eyes and ears" on activities related to doin
violence.
This Office will-
provide a central focus for policy planning;
keep track of current developments in service delivery, research, and
evaluation of domestic violence projects, and coordinate these activities;
help to develop a Department-wide research and evaluation agenda;
serve as a focal point for information both within the Department and for
other federal agenices and outside groups;
assist other HEW agencies to improve services to victims of domestic
violence;
develop, collect, and disseminate information on domestic violence;
work with other federal agencies to develop joint programs and activities;
provide the staff support for the Interdepartmental Committee on Do-
mestic \Tiolence
The Office has been in operation for only a month, yet in that short time we
have received requests for information on domestic violence, particularly on
funding sources, from groups and individuals in almost one-half of the states.
The Office is already receiving approximately fifty inquiries a week.
For fiscal year 1980, the Office will have more than one million dollars avail-
able in funds for programs and activities on domestic violence. The Office staff
has already begun to consult widely about next year's program with commu-
nity and provider groups, members of the Interdepartmental Committee, and
others interested and experienced in the field.
* As several of you have suggested, the first major activity that the Office is
undertaking is the development of a National Clearinghouse on Domestic Vio-
lence. Working with an already existing clearinghouse operation, the Office on
Domestic Violence plans to become the single, comprehensive source of informa-
PAGENO="0179"
173
tion in the federal government. We are working closely with related programs
at the Department of Justice and the National Institute of Mental Health in
this effort. Specifically, the new Office is working closely with the Law Enforce-
ment Assistance Administration and their grantee, the Center for Women's
Policy Studies, to develop and disseminate information on the availability of
resources, on organizing and implementing domestic violence programs, and on
strategies for coordinating criminal justice, community development and social
service activities at the local level.
We recognize that domestic violence is a problem that requires responsive-
ness from the criminal justice, health, shelter, and social services systems. We
hope that through these joint efforts, we will be able to capitalize on existing
resources, and avoid unnecessary duplication.
THE DEPARTMENTAL COMMITTEE ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Domestic violence requires a coordinated response from these many federal
agencies. Mechanisms are need to link the various federal, state, and local pro-
grams together in a way that is meaningful and helpful for victims of domestic
violence. This spring, the President asked Secretary Califano to organize and
chair an Interdepartmental Committee on Domestic Violence composed of repre-
sentatives of ten federal departments and agencies. These include: ACTION,
the Commission on Civil Rights, the Community Services Administration, and
the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, Housing and Urban Development,
Justice, Labor, and Interior.
The Committee was asked to co-ordinate a review of federal programs which
currently provide or could provide assistance to victims of domestic violence.
As part of that review, we will examine federal agency and program policies
which may hinder the development of domestic violence programs, and submit
recommendations to the President to strengthen the federal, state, and local
government response to this problem. The Interdepartmental Committee will
serve as a forum for this task. The Committee has begun to meet and will begin
its work by:
identifying federal agency programs and policies that relate to services
for victims of domestic violence and compiling these into a Federal Re-
sources Handbook for Domestic Violence Programs;
assisting state and local agencies to identify programs that could serve
victims of domestic violence;
facilitating joint federal and state agency activities including research,
demonstration programs, and public information activities;
exchanging information about ongoing and planned activities.
This review will enable us to determine the capability of the federal govern-
ment to respond to domestic Violence problems, to make recommendations to the
President and take the necessary steps, where possible, to enhance federal,
state, and local responsiveness to the problem.
OTHER HEW ACTIVITIES
In fiscal year 1979, HEW will spend about $1.1 million for research and dem-
onstration projects on domestic violence. Examples of these projects include-
The National Institute of Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism has funded research
on the interaction of alcohol and violence and their effect on the family.
The National Institute of Mental Health has funded:
A survey to determine the extent of violence in American families. This sur-
vey has given us the most accurate estimates we have on spouse abuse, child
abuse, and sibling abuse;
Two studies to identify possible psychological determinants that may inhibit
women from leaving a relationship in which they are battered.
The Office of Human Development Services has funded a grant to examine
state and local, as well as nonprofit agency services, to battered women and to
determine how model service systems can be transferred from one program to
another.
The National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect has been funding services
in several demonstration programs to abused mothers as well as to their children.
In fiscal year 1980, we expect that about $2.8 million will be spent on research
and demonstration projects in this area.
HEW has again proposed an amendment to title XX of the Social Security
Act which will allow state social services agencies to provide emergency shelter
PAGENO="0180"
174
to adults as a protective service. As you know, HEW proposed such an amend-
ment during the last session of Congress; it was introduced by Rep. George Miller
and passed the House, but no final action was taken by the Senate during the
last hectic days before adjournment. This amendment is included ill HR. 3434,
which was reported out of the Ways and Means Committee, and is awaiting
floor action. This amendment would enable the Department to support local
efforts by encouraging states to develop needed shelter services for battered
women and families.
Currently, states are using title XX funds for a variety of services for battered
women such as information and referral, counseling, and child care but it can
not be used to pay for emergency shelter. Forty-nine states are using funds
to provide protective services to adults; 43 are providing counseling; 43 are
providing employment services; and 43 are providing legal services to battered
women.
As demonstrated by these activities and initiatives, the President and Secre-
tary are committed to addressing the problem of domestic violence. We are
increasing our understanding of the multifaceted problem and developing the
capability to transmit this information, in terms of research, advice, and funding
sources, to the field. We are beginning throughout the federal government to
make ourselves more aware of the problem of domestic violence and to coordi-
nate the responses of our many programs.
ONGOING CONCERNS
Despite these significant steps, we are aware that in many areas not all of the
immediate services needed by battered women and their families are available
or accessible to them. The women in greatest need are those who, forced to flee
their homes, have no other place of refuge, neither friends nor family, who can
take them in and help them through a particularly severe ordeal. These women
need protection, emergency medical care, temporary shelter, and the opportu-
nity to remove themselves and, in some cases, their children from the violent
situation.
They also need follow-up services which will enable them either to set up
safe independent households for themselves and their children or to return to
their homes with some measure of protection. These follow-up services include
health care, legal services, housing or housing referral and information, income
maintenance for the provision of food, clothing and shelter, child care, counsel-
ing for victims and abusers, job training and placement, protection from further
abuse, and services designed to keep families together, where appropriate.
While there are a number of federal, state, and local programs which are
beginning to provide these services, there are three basic problems. First, they
are not available in every community. Second, there are not adequate services
available to the women who decide to return home. Third, they are often not
responsive or accessible to the needs of a frightened woman, perhaps with
serious or painful injuries, who has fled her home with her children in the
middle of the night and has no money, no access to the family resources, and no
place to go.
The real impetus for meeting the needs of battered women in a comprehensive
manner has come from local communities. As you know, the primary emphasis
of this grass roots movement has been the development of shelters for battered
women. These shelters offer protection from immediate danger, furnish infor-
mation and referral about resources available in the community and, in some
areas, act as the access point for these resources, and provide a supportive
environment which allows a battered woman to consider the best alternatives
for herself and her children.
Five years ago almost no emergency shelters for battered women existed;
now there are over 200 shelters. Shelters have been established on a shoestring
`budget by the co-operative efforts of women's groups. religious organizations.
community organizations such as the Salvation Army or YWCA, public and
private social service agencies and many dedicated individuals.
These shelters usually receive financial support from many sources: but are
the result of donations from individuals, religious organizations, community and
business organizations, volunteered services, grants from foundations and gov-
ernment funding at the city, county, State, and federal levels. They seldom
obtain stable, long range funding. While some funding is received from the
public sector, shelters receive the majority of their support from private sources.
PAGENO="0181"
175
The distribution of shelters around the country is uneven. Half of the shelters
are located in the ten most populated and urban states, and some states have
no shelters at all. Even where shelters do exist, there are problems with fund-
ning, overcrowding, and coordination with other community agencies.
We all recognize that shelters are not the solution to the problem of domestic
violence. They are necessary, important, provide community based support for
victims, and more shelters are needed than currently exist. But not all commu-
nities or all victims of domestic violence may need or want shelters. Some com-
munities have begun to develop alternative types of programs, and these pro-
grams, which include hotlines, multipurpose crisis intervention centers, family
development centers, and police intervention training projects need to be encour-
aged, their effectiveness evaluated, and their "best practices" disseminated for
use in other communities.
We must move beyond shelters and crisis intervention centers ultimately if
we are to reduce the problem of domestic violence. Additional research on iden-
tifying the extent of, and solutions to, domestic violence, public awareness
campaigns, and preventions measures are also necessary ingredients of a pro-
gram to address the root causes of domestic violence.
Mr. Chairman, you and other Members of the Committee have proposed legis-
lation that addresses many of the issues of concern. We deeply share your concern
and have taken steps to respond to many of these needs. Yet we recognize that a
portion of those needs, emergency shelter for example, are being met primarily at
the local level with little federal support. We have already proposed an amend-
ment to title XX to provide for reimbursement to states for emergency shelters
for adults. We are currently examining legislative proposals, which permit a
more comprehensive response to this problem. Several principles we are consid-
ering in developing such a response include-
a focus on prevention and obtaining access to a range of needed services
for battered spouses, as well as providing the basic needed service, emergency
shelter.
the establishment of close linkages and access to the existing services
system, instead of creating a new one.
continuation of the focus on community projects, while establishing in-
centives for state efforts which include improving access to state funded
services, and reforms in state and local law enforcement systems.
fostering innovation and experimentation in order to learn and utilize
the most effective approaches.
In closing, let me reiterate that we share your concern for the victims of
domestic violence and the needs they have. We have been exploring the best
ways to assist them, and hope that this year the Congress will enact the einer-
gency shelter amendment to title XX we have proposed. We look forward to con-
tinued discussions with you and to working together towards improving the qual-
ity of life for victims of domestic violence.
~[r. MILLER. Thank you.
Ms. MIKTJLSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Commissioner Ramirez, this testimony is so much more refreshing
than when we initiated or had our first hearings on domestic violence
approximately 14 months ago.
I would like to compliment the Secretary for establishing this tem-
porary Office, and for his choice in appointing Ms. Zeitlin.
I have some questions that are not so much as to the programmatic
activity.
What would be the difference between your temporary Office and
the legislation that we now have under consideration?
Ms. RAMIREZ. The basic difference is that the legislation we now
have under consideration provides for funding of services, and we do
not now have within the scope of the Office of Domestic Violence, pro-
vision for the funding of services.
We are analyzing those programs that we now have, and identifying
the barriers to the funding of services in those programs we now nm.
But we are not going to fund services.
PAGENO="0182"
176
Ms. M1xuI~sKr. The reason I ask that question is that there were some
questions raised yesterday that said that if you wanted to solve the
problem, and not spend any money, how would you go about doing it?
It would seem to me that, as your first step, with no appropriation,
your clearinghouse is providing information, technical assistance, and
so on.
However, is it your professional opinion, with the experience that
you have had with calls coming in, that the temporary Office provid-
ing information and advice is no substitute for funds that will provide
direct services, and that some type of legislation for services as well
as information is absolutely needed?
Ms. IRAMIREZ. My professional opinion is a little more complex
than that. No, the Office is no substitute for services. But I think that
it is incumbent upon the Office to look at ways in which our existing
service programs can provide those funds for services. I am very con-
cerned, Ms. Mikulski, because I run a number of very small service
programs, that we not concentrate on another small service program
to the exclusion of looking at the other ways in which services could
be focused on this particular population. I am thinking of the popu-
lation as the total family.
Let me tell you a little about the runaway-youth program-it has
a small appropriation, and we fund temporary shelters. That legisla-
tion is always in some kind of trouble because the appropriation is
always too small. For the runaway youth, I want to get title XX
and other service programs. We have to sta.rt concentrating on the
population.
I think that the Office of Domestic Violence must look at the other
service programs that are run by HEW, HTJD, and other agencies,
and try to influence the channeling of service moneys to the problem
of domestic violence.
Ms. MIKui~sKr. I could not agree with you more. My experience has
been that the runaway youth tends to be from situations where there
is enormous drug abuse, alcoholism, and usually tha.t is tied with
violence, either physical or emotional trauma. A kid does not run
away simply because he wants to find himself.
Ms. RAMTREZ. It is not an adventure, any more.
Ms. MIKnLSKI. When you talk about the coordination with the Fed-
eral Council, there are several things which I would like to bring to
your attention.
One, I consider it a very important function, not only to working
with the internal programs of HEW, but also there are other pro-
grams where the very nature of the regulations works against what we
want to do.
We heard yesterday the testimony of a resea.rch assistant from the
Kansas City Police Department, who outlined in rather clear spec-
ificity those regulations, for example, that t.he Department of Agri-
culture and a whole host of other things that work against it.
We would like to share with you just those preliminary identifica-
tions, so that we are not really working against each other.
Would Secretary Califano have the power, within this Coordinating
Council, to encourage other agencies to be more flexible, and integrate
those services?
PAGENO="0183"
177
Ms. RAMIREZ. We will be making recommendations to the President,
through the Secretary, about exactly those kinds of issues. We wouhi
welcome the identification of those practical things that can be done'
here and now, so that we can we make those recommendations more
complete.
Ms. MIKTILSKI. My final point-when you talk about exploring other
legislative options, I don't know what would be better than a big:
Miller-Mikulski bill, but could you outline for us what are these other
legislative options, what direction HEW is leaning in, and when can we
expect a decision?
Ms. RAMIREZ. The legislative options, basically, focus around issi~es
related to the degree of State involvement, the funding mechanism
for the funding of services, the degree of linkage to the title XX pro-
gram, with greater Federal direction or more direction by the States.
Those are generally the issues which we are examining in considering
legislative options. I cannot give you a date for a decision on those
legislative options. We are looking at budget issues.
Ms. MIKUL5KI. Do you have kind of a target framework, though?
I know that it will not come on the Feast of the Assumption, or any-
thing like that.
Ms. RAMIREZ. I would hope that we would be able to participate
with the committee in the consideration of the current piece of legisla-
tion once we have made the decision about our own options. I don't
think that it is too far away.
Ms. MIKUL5KI. I understood what she said, but please don't ask me
to explain it.
Mr. Chairman, I don't have any further questions.
I would like again to thank you for the advances that have been
made.
I am working on the children's legislation with Mr. Waxman, which
is an integral part of what we all want to accomplish. I am going to
excuse myself to go over to that. If you don't see me around, it is be-
cause I am over there.
Mr. MILLER. Mr. Stack?
Mr. STACK. I commend the expert witness for a very excellent state-
ment. I will now leave and do my duty.
Mr. MILLER. The committee is going to recess. I will have some
c~uestions when I come back. There is a vote following this vote~ so we
shrnild he hack in ~tbout 20 minutes, if the witnesses would remain.
IRecess.]
*Mr. MILLER. The committee will convene to continue to hear from
witnesses representing the administration.
Ms. Ramirez, to put it nolitely. let me say I am not all that delighted,
as my colleagues are, with the testimony of the administration. I do
recognize that it is a long ways away from where the administration
was last year and far more positive, but my concern is that we appear to
be going down a road which concerns me because I think, to some ex-
tent, it is a road that has discredited many programs of the past in the
eyes of the public, and that is. that prior to the delivery of service~ one,
we are starting to snend some money, not in this case all that much,
hut $1 miTlion, which I would be interested in knowing where it came
from at least, and the time of a lot of people to coordinate, to become
PAGENO="0184"
178
Tinnovative, and to analyze programs which I am prepared to stand to
be corrected on, for which they have never participated in or delivered
service once.
That is my concern. I don't think it is enough to say that you recog-
nize that-and I am looking for your statement-but I believe it is
along the lines that this work is not a substitute for services. It is a
candid statement, but it does not solve the problem. My concern is this:
We have seen the sheltered network in this country and citizens who
are concerned with the problems of spouse abuse, family violence, child
:.`abuse, however you want to term it, who have volunteered their time,
~who have run their operations on a shoestring-some have longer
~hoestrings than others-but they have gone out, as we have heard
testified yesterday, and made a great deal more progress than they did
a year ago in securing LEAA funds, community bloc grants. because
they obviously were able to show local governments the problems and
rthe benefits of action volunteers, because they are readily available and
also because they had somewhere to put them. It is just a difference in
philosophy, I guess, because I think if you continue to nurture the
~grassroot~s movement and to provide them the wherewithal to hold on,
they will find these Federal services with or without this coordina.tion.
I think the coordination should take place, but it can't be a substitute.
I do not think I can sit here and suggest that we can let time go by. I
think that if the administration really is in a position that they can't
\endorse funding for shelters and the services provided by shelters
much more far-reaching than suggested in your statement. because
they do provide a multitude of services, counseling. hotlines, reception,
followup, job placement, all of which can be coordinated, so you have
the opportunity to either provide the coordination at 200 local levels
as of today, or Washington, D.C., where people can write for a
handbook. -
I don't mean to make light of it, but I think it is a question of where
delivery of services and information is going to take place. I am ter-
ribly concerned about that. I think the exciting thing about your state-
ment is that absent some harriers, there are some tremendous resources
that can be put in place if the people and those agencies a-nd the De-
partment really want to deal with the problem.
~ don't think you can sit here, and I don't think the committee can
rsit here. and suggest that if my amendment or anyl)ody's amendment
~on title XX is passed, tha.t that is going to solve the problem. We are
going to have a fight here to raise title XX by $1/2 billion. It has been
undercapitalized for 7 or 8 years. There are barracuda in that pond.
Now. are you going to throw this little fledging in and say, "You
compete for title XX funds"? I am fighting like hell to keep foster
~children. who have a much larger constituency than this, in title XX.
Russell Long wants to put these people in title XX. You are telling a
lot of novices. "Jump in. the water is fine." That is the way to stop a
program at this point unless the administration wants to commit the
money based upon need rather than the suggestion of 0MB.
I think that that is my concern. I don't think it is rhetorical. I
think it is really a question of what are you going to purchase for the
$15 million to $20 million to $30 million a~ year in the way of relieving
the pain and coping wit-h the problem, and what are you going to
purchase at the end of all these machinations that you could not get
PAGENO="0185"
179
~otherwise from people building constituencies at the local level to get
the Federal Government to respond to what they perceive as a prob-
lem and obviously have some constituency for it.
When we wrote the legislation, we took hours of testimony and we
kept asking people who were directly involved in the delivery of
services, "How would you do this?" Most of them, I think, have been.
through this bureaucratic maze and it did not work very well. That
is why the original bill, interestingly, was so abhorrent, because there
was not enough Government control by the conservatives on the com-
mittee; they thought we were going to throw the money away because
we didn't want this to happen, we didn't want to study the victim,
we did not want to coordinate and analyze because there are people
out there who have done that.
To suggest that the Federal Government has to do it before it gets
a stamp of approval is a mistake, in my mind. I am concerned, unless
there is some assurance that this is going to be followed up by some
supportive services. I am just not going to give you credit yet for the
placement of ACTION people, for the placement of LEAA grants,
for getting HUD and others to talk about other housing problems,
because that happened in response to what local individuals did. I can't
give you credit for that.
Now, I want to know, when are you going to create the "new" that
is going to relieve the pain? That is my concern.
Ms. RAMIREZ. I can't disagree with anything you have said. I would
like to allay some of your fears. First of all, your question about where
the money came from. What we have done is caused those agencies
within HEW who we believe, have a. mandate to do research which
touches on issues related to domestic violence, we have caused, because
of the Secretary's concern, a clearer focusing of that responsibility
in those agencies. Maybe we don't deserve credit for that because they
should have been doing it anyway. Those things don't happen unless
somebody in thebureaucracy advocates for them to happen and causes
that focus to occur.
We are not asking for the credit for what local people have done~
As a matter of fact, every program in my agency is a program run.
by people at the local level; that is why I happen to think that their
programs work.
\~\Te would not minimize the importance of putting the resources
of the Federal Government most directly in the hands of the l)eOP1e
with the greatest stake in seeing to it that those persons work. At the'
same time, as you know, we are caii~ht in a bind because the question
becomes how much Federal leadership can we exert when our ability
to exert leadership is not there, such as through title XX which puts:
much of that responsibility at the State level.
So throughout all of that I think the most appronriate response is.
one which is not a leader but one in which the Federal Government
in an agency like ACYF and OHDS~ which is supposed to be con~
cerned about people, captures in a focused way every opportunity that
we have to make those programs targeted on people at the local ieveL
That is why we are continuing out of ACYF and OHDS and HEW to~
press for looking at the legislative options for the condition of those
services at the local level.
PAGENO="0186"
180
It is a very difficult time to be pressing for those kinds of things,
but we think the creation of an Office of Domestic Violence, the crea-
tion of interest in other departments in the administration and in the
Federal Government, the collection of information about ways in
which these things can work, will put us in a better position to capture
the opportunity to do the most that we can with those mandates we
now have and to examine in the most effective way the opportunities
that we might have to press for the provision of services at the local
level.
Mr. MILLER. You can obviously argue the different cause, not to
be trite, but that is a sort of Jerry Brown approach to a problem.
Ms. RAMIREZ. I don't know Jerry Brown.
Mr. MILLER. You talk about doing something, or you put new money
into mental health. When you get there, you find out it is different
money, the same money, it has been washed, colored a little different;
it is not new money.
You talk about getting programs, whether it is LEAA which comes
under severe fire in the Congress in the funding. You are talking about
ACTION, which this committee knows better than anyone has some
problems in terms of new money~ of doing more.
Now, you can't just run the Government like that, because at some
point it is just like deferred maintenance on a house; it just falls down
around you.
When I say "you," I am not talking about you; I am talking about
the administration. It may not be the time to press for renewed pro-
grams, but it is not time to dismantle the Government in light of need.
There is a difference. Surely we will never again see the Great Society
programs for some time to come, and I am not sure we should; but
when you have local community responses to a problem, I am not sure
the Federal Government should press forward for a Federal pro-
gram. The question is: Are we going to help provide resources?
I am not going to look for Federal leadership. In this case I abhor
Federal leadership because I think there are a lot of people out there
who can do it better, more efficiently, can do it easier, or can write the
grants or whatever the mechanism is to trigger funding, to put people
to work.
I am not here concerned about creating Federal leadership and the
overhead. I would not create State overhead if I had my druthers on
this bill, but that did not work out. You can't mislead these people
because they have gone too far in terms of trying to create a network
to help these people and expressions of concern are not enough; and
the administration-not you, the administration-has got to under-
stand that. If, in these times, they can't risk their credibility-they
don't `have to support my bill; let them write their own bill-but in
`these times if they can't stretch out a little social conscience credibility
~on behalf of these people and try to suggest you are going to bootstrap
:it from child abuse studies and bootstrap it from other ongoing opera-
~tions that are starving to death, is a bit misleading.
That is my concern.
~We have to go vote. again.
Mr. STACK. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make this one observa-
tion: You are never trite but sometimes you do lapse into parochial-
ism.
PAGENO="0187"
181
With that, I feel I just got here.
Mr. MILLER. Can I give you my card?
Mr. STACK. What was that name again? Was it Jerry?
Mr. MILLER. If you feel you would like to respond, you can do it
right now. I have said my piece. I felt that I needed to respond.
Are there any questions by other members of the `committee?
I don't think so. Mr. Stack is out of questions. If I don't melt in the
meantime, I will be back very shortiy. We are working under the
President's energy policy right here in this building.
Thank you very much for coming and telling us what the adminis-
tration is planning on doing.
Mr. MILLER. Next we will hear from Sam Brown.
Let me ask, if you will cooperate in this effort. My understanding
is that we heard yesterday the National Coalition Against Domestic
Violence is doing a paper and analysis of title XX and some of the bar-
riers in terms of access. They are going to submit that to you, or to
HEW, but I think, specifically, to your office, for comment. We are
going to mark this bill up right after Labor Day. It will be very help-
ful if, after we get that paper, we could provide some immediate com-
ments and responses, so that the committeee can share in that under-
standing before we write the legislation, because there may be some
things we want to change in terms of barriers within programs.
The jurisdiction of the Education and Labor Committee we can
deal with.
Mr. BROWN. We just talked with the thairperson of the council, and
she will be sharing that information with you.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you.
iBrief recess.]
Mr. MILLER. Welcome to the committee. We look forward to hearing
how you have gone about directing some of your resources to helping
people to run shelters and supplying some people, and what you
expect to do in the future.
STATEMENT OF SAM BROWN, DIRECTOR, ACTION, ACCOMPANIED
BY TORRIE MATTES, OFFICE OF POLICY AND PLANNING; KATH-
LEEN FOFTIK, NATIONAL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CENTER;
AND SHARON VAUGHAN, WOMEN'S SHELTER, ST. PAUL, MINN.
Mr. BROWN. Mr. Chairman, it is a pleasure to be here. I have to say
in all candor I have rarely felt that way in recent weeks about my
appearances but it is always a pleasure to see you and I appreciate the
chance to be here.
There are a couple of other people with me that I would like to
introduce who can provide additional information. Torrie Mattes is
here, who is in the Office of Policy and Planning who has been working
on the interdepartmental committee.
There are two people here, Kathleen Fojtik who, in addition to being
a county commissioner in Washtenaw County, Mich., which is the
Ann Arbor district, runs the National Technical Assistance Center,
which I am going to talk about in my testimony, and is the director of
Safe House. She is a community person who has some relationship to
the Federal Government.
PAGENO="0188"
182
Sharon Vaughn is here who was, when she was a VISTA volunteer,
the founder of what is said to be the first women's shelter in the
country in St. Paul, Minn., and is now with the shelter in Minneapolis.
We are proud to say that we have tried not to take a Jerry Brown
approach to the problems that we face but a somewhat different ap-
proach. I believe we have had some of the most extensive experiences
in addressing the issue of violence in the home. We have now about
600 volunteers working in 30 States on about 100 different projects
through 3 different programs, some through VISTA, some through
RSVP and some through Foster Grandparents, working on problems
of violence in the home.
Last year we funded, a National Technical Assistance Center to try
to provide some forms of assistance on the problem. IVe funded it at
the level of $300,000. The center is in its 11th month of existence. It
has responded to over 20,000 specific requests for information on
domestic violence-all of it growing from a local volunteer, principally
a volunteer base-programs, shelter programs around the country.
It may be interesting for the committee to note tha.t for this year
when we had $750,000 total in discretionary moneys for grants for
innovative programs in volunteer activity to be divided among five
areas of concern, one of those areas was in domestic violence.
For the $150,000 which was designated in each of those issues we
had 156 applications from shelters around the country for assistance,
financial assistance. That is 150 applications for $150,000 for which
we were able to assist three, which would suggest that the need exceeds
the ability to meet it at this point.
The center which I referred to, the National Center for providing
technical assistance, provides "hands on" expertise to the volunteers.
A shelter cannot help people if it cannot. pass a health inspection, if it
cannot meet zoning requiren-ients, if it cannot pay the telephone bill.
We surveyed 162 organizations around the country and it is largely
on the basis of that survey of shelters that I would like to make three
comments about specific areas of very real need that we see.
One is that despite any kind of technical assistance, many pro-
grams, it appears, are going to be in serious trouble if CETA funds
are cut as now appears to be a possibility. CETA funds now provide
about 45 percent of the support money for professiona.l staff in centers.
Of the 84 shelters that responded to that question on the survey, about
45 percent of the professional staff came from CETA.
Any cut in CETA would have a devastating effect on t:he ability
to have a full professional staff and to keep the centers open on any
kind of professional basis.
The second concern is need in rural areas which are now dramat-
ically underserved. Of the 162 organizations that were involved in
this survey, only 5 of them serve in communitie.s of under 20,000 and
anecdotally we know of areas, for instance, I place in Nebraska. where
a woman came 150 miles, including driving on back roads for fear of
her husband and ended up the last 75 miles after an automobile break-
down, or something, hitching and cathhing rides to get. to the nea.rest
center where they could provide any kind of supportive services.
It is clear that rural areas are. dramatically underserved. The lack
of public transportation, lack of opportunity for housing, community
health centers in rural areas exacerbates an already existing problem.
PAGENO="0189"
183
The third concern we have is that the Federal Government in any
approach it takes to the problem needs to complete and support the
work of local volunteers. H.R. 2977, requiring three-quarters of all
the funding to go to private nonprofit agencies, is a substantial step
in the right direction in assuring that the money ends up in the group
that is already there which can use it most effectively.
Finally, I would like to simply point out that from the agency's
standpoint in terms of trying to deal with this problem, it appears
to us that there is need for a comprehensive approach to the problem
in addition to specific needs which the shelter movement now has. It is
pretty clear that violence is a learned behavior trait.
Frequently, men who beat their wives are themselves past victims
of child abuse. They are the sons of child batterers, turn out to be
future criminals, turn out to be future batterers themselves. There
are very serious problems that need to be addressed that comprehen.
sively focus on the need to deal with the spouses and the children.
Lou Harris did a poll about a year ago now, the results of which
it seems to me were very important because people were asked to rank
those things which they saw as the most important concerns in their
life and the list was a broader list than the normal energy or this or
that or the other thing, public issue concerns, but also addressed some
private issue concerns.
The three things which came out on top in that survey, in terms of
the most important, were family life, health, and peace of mind.
It is very clear that the issue with which you are dealing in do-
mestic violence deals very centrally with all three of those issues
which the American people rank as the most critical issues in their
lives. An approach now has, I believe, the capacity to offset long-term
cost by the expenditure of some moneys now. The present cost of not
addressing the issue is clearly too high.
We are pleased to be a part of an effort to help address the problem
but we believe that there are some critical areas of continuing need
for addressing it.
I have submitted prepared testimony for the statement which I
have just summarized, so, if we can insert the prepared testimony.
Mr. MILLBR. It may be inserted in the record in its entirety.
[The prepared statement of Sam Brown follows:]
TESTIMONY OF SAMUEL W. BROWN, DIRECTOR OF THE ACTION AGENCY,
BEFORE THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SELECT EDUCATION
Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, last year I appeared before this
committee to testify on proposed legislation which would have provided federal
support for the work of thousands of American citizens who are volunteering to
help the victims of domestic family violence. At that time, I focused my remarks
on the concepts that buttressed the work of these volunteers, especially our com-
mitment to support locally based community groups. This year I would like to
be more specific. ACTION, as an agency, has some of the most extensive experi-
ence in addressing the issue of violence in the home. We take some pride in the
fact that Sarah Vaughn, a VISTA volunteer, created what is now recognized as
the first modern day shelter for battered women in 1974.
In the intervening five years, volunteers all across America have responded to
the needs of those who need help. Eighty per cent of the approximately 210
shelters which now exist in this country that provide comprehensive services for
seven days or longer have been started by volunteers within the last five years.
This fact alone is testimony to the continued concern and generosity of the
American people.
49-9 14-79-----13
PAGENO="0190"
184
ACTION, as an agency, has remained committed to helping community based
groups help the battered wife, the abused child, and even the angry husband who
from learned experience believes violence in the home is as American as apple
pie. Much of our effort has been in the form of human capital-the time, com-
mitment, resourcefulness, and love of our volunteers. At present, approximately
six hundred ACTION volunteers are working ill thirty states on about one hund-
red domestic violence projects. Three of ACTION's programs-VISTA, RSVP,
and our Foster Grandparent program are involved in this effort.
Last year, ACTION took another step in developing a response to family vio-
lence by becoming the first federal agency to provide technical assistance to
volunteer groups across the nation. Since August of 1978, ACTION's National
Technical Assistance Center in Ann Arbor and its ten regional centers have
responded to over 20,000 requests for information and technical assistance around
the issue of domestic violence.
A brief description of the National Technical Assistance Center may be in
order. The Center and its ten regional centers are funded through a grant of
$300,000. The principle focus of its work is to provide practical, "hands on"
expertise to the volunteers that have created and maintained the majority of
crisis centers and shelters in the country. Our concern in establishing the Cen-
ter was to assure their ability to respond to the growing demands on them. An
estimated 3500 women are being helped each month according to a survey con-
ducted by the Center of one hundred and sixty two programs, and that number
will grow as more women and men become aware that they can be helped. We
had discovered that while the volunteers who had started these shelters had
the commitment and caring to help others, they in many cases simply didn't have
the experience and expertise to respond as effectively as they might to women
in need.
A second problem was that the volunteers who started the centers often lacked
a business sense of how a twenty four hour crisis center should properly function.
The business of running a shelter had taken a back seat to responding to the
immediate crisis at hand. To some extent this is to be expected. It is difficult for
a volunteer to see how spending their time setting up good bookkeeping pro-
cedures, learning zoning laws, or how to raise fuiids is of prime importance when
they are confronted with a woman who has just been beaten and fears for her
personal safety. The instinctive reaction is to respond to the crisis at hand-to
help the women in need. But the dry, practical business of maintaining a center
and ensuring that it has the full support of the local community must be done
if a center is to be successful. A shelter for battered women can't provide shelter
unless it meets the health and zoning laws. A crisis center can't provide the
psychological counseling a victim of a beating may immediately need unless it
can pay the bills. Volunteers can't help a woman who has just been beaten unless
they know how to end her hysteria or break through her isolation by proper
counseling.
The goal of our National Technical Assistance Center and the ten regional
centers has been to provide community volunteer groups with the practical advice
they need-the "how to" of how to do things. This help is both informational and
direct. The Technical Assistance Center has provided volunteers with "how to"
manuals on every aspect of the business of running a shelter from training vol-
unteers on how to counsel victims to how to write a grant proposal. Our technical
experts, who are locally based, have often simply packed up their bags and gone
to where help is needed.
A second focus of the National Center has been to take the practical experience
these volunteers are gaining and assure that this information is shared. To that
end, each of our regional centers has focused on a particular aspect of meeting
the needs of the victims they help and the business of managing shelters effec-
tively. In the next six months each region will hold a conference to discuss their
specific projects. For example, in the Far West the regional center in Southern
California is focusing on effective volunteer intervention and prevention. In The
South our regional center has focused its attention on prevention. In New York
the concentration has been on how to raise money. We believe that this spe-
cialization of expertise is a fine example of how a decentralized community based
system of helping organizations can have a national impact without losing their
community base. These organizations are at the heart of the movement to help
the victims of domestic violence. In the last year they have organized almost
thirty statewide coalitions of shelters. Much of this has been accomplished under
the leadership of Mary Berg from the Chairman's homestate of Illinois.
PAGENO="0191"
185
In the eleven months that our Technical Assistance Center has been in opera-
tiott we have gathered specific information that may be of assistance to committee
members in your deliberations. Some of this information has come to us as a
result of a survey conducted by the Technical Assistance Center in October of
1978 which was responded to by one hundred and sixty two domestic violence
projects. I have submitted the complete survey results for the record along with
a more detailed analysis of the eighty four shelters that prov'ide emergency
housing for victims and their children.
The first observation is that the most critical need facing existing shelters is
the need for continued funding. The number one question that is asked across
the country is how to continue existing projects. This problem will become more
acute with the change in CETA regulations. Of the eighty four shelters that
responded to our survey 45 percent receive their primary funding from CETA
and 20 percent receive the majority of their funding from LEAA. The funding
pattern is significant because it indicates the short term special project nature
of the funding currently available for domestic violence programs.
The new CETA guidelines fund public employment jobs for up to eighteen
months with a possible extension for another eighteen months. Current shelter
programs may be seriously impaired by the lack of continuity and constant
change in staffing if they are unable to gain an extension for another eighteen
months or find additional local funding sources that provide them with a perma-
nent base. Volunteers are the backbone of the movement to help the victims of
domestic violence. I have no doubt that they will remain the backbone of future
efforts. They have brought the issue to the attention of the American people.
They have manned the hotlines and staffed the shelters on a twenty four hour
basis. But these volunteers can not provide all the long term professional help
that is needed or the continuity that is required for these programs to succeed.
At the very least professional staff is needed to guide and supervise the volun-
teers.
I do not believe that the existing level of federal support will lead to total
dependence on the Federal Treasury for support and I would not support such
a move. The shelter movement has been successful because it has a community
base. One of the tangible aspects of that base has been the funding support these
shelters receive from their local community. This support should not be allowed
to disappear. But the potential reduction of existing federal support is a major
concern of most programs that are now in operation.
A second observation is that the needs of rural communities are acute. The
second most asked question over the last eleven months has been "how to start
services in rural communities?" Many rural communities lack the infrastruc-
ture-transportation, community mental health centers, housing, and employ-
ment opportunities that victims of family violence need. We know of one case
where a woman in a rural area attempted to walk to a shelter one hundred and
fifty miles away from her home. For fear of her husband she used backroads
and actually had walked seventy-five miles before she received transportation
to the center.
A third concern is that the focus of the ongoing research about the domestic
violence might well be decentralized. Much of the research can be done by the
people who are in the field doing the work. All future research efforts should
not be centralized in Washington. Mary Berg, the director of the Community
Crisis Center in Elgin, Illinois which is one of our regional centers has four
years of data compiled. What she needs is the support to analyze the data she
has collected. What is not needed is for someone in Washington to start a re-
search project from scratch on the same subject. The Federal Government should
not be in the business of reinventing the wheel again and again as so often has
happened in the past. I make this observation only to stress that there is an
existing and expanding network of community based volunteer groups that
has been doing constructive work in addressing the issue of domestic violence.
The Federal Government should not try to take the place of community volunteer
groups.
A fourth observation is that responding to the immediate crisis of helping a
battered women is oniy half the solution. Prevention must be stressed and a
successful prevention program must also see men as victims. The problem of a
battered spouse is not just an issue that should concern women. The men today
who beat their wives are in many cases also victims. Violence in the family is a
learned behavior. Men who beat their wives are the past victims, present victims,
and their sons may well be future victims if we only view this issue as one that
PAGENO="0192"
186
should concern women. If we are to stop the next generation of wife beaters from
developing prevention must be stressed, and this prevention should have as its
focus getting whatever help is necessary for the children who come from violent
homes. The short term costs of such help will more than be offset by the long~
term cost savings. The present cost to society of not addressing this issue is toa
great:
Forty percent of the women in Cooke County jail are there for murdering their
hubands who beat them yet everyone of them called the police five times or more
prior to the killing;
A survey of San Quentin prison revealed that 100 percent of those interviewed
indicated that they had been victims of family violence or had witnessed their
mothers beaten at the hands of their fathers;
Eighty percent of the children in the special education programs in Takoma,
Washington, come from violent homes.
Louis Harris in poll taken last October asked Americans what were the most
important things in their lives. The three most important concerns were-family
life, health, and peace of mind. Each of these conceriis is in a direct way
affected by family violence. To the extent that the Federal Government can hell)
the many Americans seeking to address this problem we will be in a very direct
way be responding to the most important concerns of the American people.
Mr. MILLER. In the placement, specifically in the placement. of
VISTA volunteers, they are placed in existing programs, is that. right,
shelters or what?
Mr. BROWN. Theoretically, the guidelines would permit the possi-
bility of placement in an area where they could be creating a new
institution, not simply already an existing institution. The rea.l world
impact, however, is somewhat different.
As you know, we are on a continuing resolution. The direct. results
of that is that because of conmiitment.s made a year or two ago we have
an ongoing obligation to fulfill the volunteer assignment we have al-
ready made and have little latitude in terms of new assignments.
In real world terms, basically the volunteers end up most frequently
in an existing instiution with some capacity to help in the institution-
building process, supporting the Sharon Vaughns of this world who
are building new institutions.
Mr. MILLER. They are there at the request of the local program?
Mr. BROWN. That is right.
Mr. MILLER. They put in a. request that they want a VISTA volun-
teer or they like foster grandparents maybe to deal with some of the
problems of bringing children to the shelter and in an abuse program
you can have both without any problem?
Mr BROWN. You can have both.
Mr. MILLER. How long have you had them?
Mr. BRoWN. You can have both. It is theoretically possible. We look
for joint sponsorship not only with those programs but directly with
OSA programs as well.
Mr. MILLER. How long have you been placing people at the request
of some of these programs in this type of program. abuse-oriented
program?
Mr. BROWN. I frankly do not know. I know there has been a good
deal of encouragement of it the last year. VISTA's have been involved
at least since 1974, and some of our foster grandparent volunteers
have been involved with this issue for approximately 12 years.
Mr. MILLER. They have had access to volunteers for this purpose
if they have made that request?
Mr. BROWN. I simply want to make the real world point that that
is pretty limited.
PAGENO="0193"
187
Mr. MILLER. I understand that. My point is that there is in fact
an institutional responsibility by the ACTION agencies. I do not
want to start pitting agencies against one another. The point is that
there is the ability of at least your agency to respond to the direct
demand for services by local entities given your funding problem?
Mi. BROWN. That is correct.
Mr. MILLER. That is my point. Let me ask you this: You are involved
in the interdepartmental task force.
Mr. BROWN. That is correct.
Mr. MILLER. Can somebody tell me what is going on there from
your viewpoint?
Ms. MATTES. The committee has only met once at this point. We tried
to encourage the mutual support concept to ascertain exactly what
the agencies were doing, what sections we could get involved with and
what would be our role in the future. It was not as extensive as we
would have liked to see. It was a preliminary meeting.
Mr. MILLER. Can I make an assumption that there will be a second
meeting?
Ms. MATTES. I hope so. We have also had informal meetings all the
way through this, specifically dealing with research and development
programs of all the different agencies. That has been ongoing process
during the last year.
Mr. MILLER. You are not at this stage recommending perhaps that
your technical assistance operation either becomes the model or in
fact the vehicle for carrying out part of the clearinghouse functions?
Ton have nothing that far?
Ms. MATTES. We will be recommending that in the near future.
Mr. MILLER. I do not know, how good is your technical assistance?
Ms. MATTES. It is excellent.
Mr. MILLER. My concern is that in the effort to build something that
uppears to be new you just start running over old ground. That is my
concern when I heard the previous testimony. It is one thing to take
all of the components and coordinate them and say that we had a more
efficient operation. It is another thing to take all of them and then
declare you have grabbed the high ground. I do rot think one is
necessarily so. It delays the implementation of other programs that
are ill existence.
Mr. BROWN. Our approach to that last year was to provide the
funding to basically already existing networks. That is to try to find
the people in various parts of the country. The mechanism for that
ivas through a central grantee. We did some subgrants to programs
around the country that had particular expertise in particular areas.
So that it is not run out of Washington. It is run out of Ann Arbor.
it is not run directly by Federal employees. It is run through a grantee
network that consists essentially of people who are already involved
~n the shelter movement over the preceding year.
It was "hands-on" experience. It was not somebody from here going
out and saying, "Hey, what about this?" It was people who had gone
through a fundraising in their local community and could help another
shelter figure out how to get United Way or Good Person Foundation
to put un some money to make it work.
Mr. SIMON. As I read through your statement, it kind of follows
on the quetsion Mr. Miller asks. Your third concern here is that future
PAGENO="0194"
188
research efforts should not be centralized in Washington. The Federal
Government should not be in the business of reinventing the wheel
again and again as so often has happened in the past.
The Federal Government should not try to take the place of com-
munity volunteer groups. Do you see some dangers in this legislation?
Is it possible that it needs further amendment? Are you suggesting
that or am I reading `something in your testimony that is not meant
to be read into your testimony?
Mr. BROWN. My own view is that this year's legislation moves in a
direction that makes it more possible to be responsive.
Less likely it will be dominated from Washington and more likely
it will be responsive to local concerns. So, I have no `amendments to
recommend. I am sort of raising the flag.
Mr. SrrsroN. Good. Thank you.
Mr. Mmr~. I have no more questions. I think you are one of the
bright spots, given all of the administrative problems you have had
with Congress and elsewhere, to be able to place people and to respond.
I know a number of programs that `have volunteers from your agency.
I like to think they are doing a little bit better because of it.
I think it also shows, and I think the next witness from LEAA
also shows, the response is possible now and there are some places
where there are legislative barriers and I do not think it requires great
imagination to eradicate them and keeping to the intent of the law.
I appreciate your testimony because I think it is very important to
show that if we can create the vehicle to receive the services and the
support of the Federal Government, that the services and support can
be there. If you do not have a shelter, a hot line, if you do not have an
organization that is alive and well, you do not have anywhere to send
your volunteers. I think that is the bottom line.
Mr. BROWN. I appreciated that. I am always reticent to add any
emendation to somebody who says something nice about what we have
done. I simply want to reinforce again the resource problem, one with
which you are very well aware. We would like to do more.
Mr. MILLER. Next we will hear from the representatives of the Law
Enforcement and Assistance Adrninistration~ Mr. Robert Grimes, who
will be accompanied by Jeannie Neidermeyer-Santos.
STATEMENT OP r. ROBERT GRIMES, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR,
OFFICE OP CRIMINAL FUSTICE PROGRAMS, LAW ENFORCEMENT
ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION; ACCOMPANIED BY FEANNIE
NEIDERMEYER-SANTOS, PROGRAM MANAGER, FAMILY VIO-
LENCE PROGRAM
Mr. GiimrEs. With your permission, I would like to submit my for-
mal statement for the record. We will be glad to respond to questions
at the end. Jeannie Neidermeyer-Santos is the Program Director of our
family violence program. She will have the detailed expertise for any
questions you may have.
The Law Enforcement Assistance Administration is indeed pleased
to he here to discuss programs designed to prevent domestic violence
and provide services to victims of domestic violence. This is an area in
which LEAA has been quite active. I am pleased to report that, in
PAGENO="0195"
189
spite of future cuts that are now being proposed in our appropriation~
we intend to contInue our strong commitment and priority to family
violence programs.
I cannot say at this time, however, the kind of resources we will have
available for the program in the future.
Family and domestic violence has become increasingly recognized~
as a problem of national scope. Intrafamily difficulties may manifest
themselves as physical violence against spouses or children, psychologi-~
cal abuse, or neglect of basic needs.
Instances of domestic violence have become well documented in
recent years as authorities have become more sensitized to the prob-
1cm. Just as it is apparent that domestic violence takes many forms
and has many implications, it is also clear that governmental agencies
and private organizations must work to develop more effective preven-
tion and treatment mechanisms.
It is the mission of LEAA to provide leadership and financial and
technical assistance to State and local governments, as well as private
nonprofit organizations, in order to increase their efficiency and effec-
tiveness in dealing with criminal and juvenile justice issues. LEAA is
not an operational agency and does not itself directly provide services..
LEAk funds are, however, used to support the operations of State and
local agencies.
In the fall of 1977, LEAA announced a major new discretionary
initiative aimed at reducing and preventing domestic violence and
sexual abuse. Subsequently, $1.8 million in fiscal year 1978 funds was
awarded to support eleven local demonstration projects which adopted
a comprehensive approach and provided for the active involvement of
all relevent public and private agencies. This fiscal year, we plan to
provide $1 million to an additional nine projects. `six in rural areas and
three in urban jurisdictions. To provide a greater emphasis on the
domestic violence problems of the poor, the Community Services Ad-
ministration is contributing $125,000 to the program and will join us
in supporting five of these projects.
The response to our family violence program has been positive. The
level of interest is indicated by the fact that we received approximately
1,400 requests for copies of the guidelines. Formal applications were
submitted by 130 organizations.
The family violence program is built upon the premise that physical
and sexual assaults on family members are crimes and that the criminal
justice system therefore has an important role to play in the resolu-
tion of these problems. The program focuses on the role of the criminal
justice system in preventing and controlling violent and abusive behav--
ior in the home.
By concentrating its resources on the criminal justice system, LEAA
does not imply that the part which criminal justice agencies play'
in the resolution of family violence should be expanded. Instead, we
are seeking to define the appropriate responsibilities of the criminal
justice system and improve the system's response to crimes in the
home.
The approach is termed comprehensive `because it foresees the need,
for cooperative interaction with social service agencies and commu-
nity-based groups. The tension which normally exists between the
PAGENO="0196"
190
punitive nature of the justice system and the treatment models of the
social service system must be eased in order to meet this need.
The family violence program is the outgrowth of several grants
made in earlier years under the victim/witness assistance program.
Through that program, LEAA sought to encourage local governments
to improve their response to crime victims and witnesses. Special
attention was given to the victims of rape, sexual abuse (including
incest) and spousal abuse because victims seldom reported these "sen-
sitive crimes" and were reluctant to cooperate with authorities.
By 1977, it was clear to LEAA that the problem of spouses and
children being injured and sexually exploited by family members
required new approaches. Grants were made to two hospitals carry-
ing on programs for sexually abused children and four organizations
providing shelter and other services for battered women. The experi-
ences of these projects and others like them show that the people who
come for assistance are often from families where more than one
member is being abused and needs help.
The American Humane Association, in a 25-State study funded
by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, recently re-
ported that the physical abuse of a spouse has been documented in
nearly 20 percent of all validated cases of child abuse and neglect.
For this reason, the family violence program focuses on the several
forms of victimization that occur in the home, including, but not
limited to, child/adolescent abuse, interspousal abuse, and abuse of
the elderly.
In June 1977, a grant was made to the Center for Women Policy
Studies in Washington, D.C., to establish a newsletter and clearing-
house for information-sharing among people concerned with the
problems of intra-family violence and sexual assault, as well as to
provide technical assistance to community groups interested in ini-
tiating and/or improving services for victims of sensitive crime. The
grant has since been extended.
The Center sends the newsletter to 20.000 individuals and organiza-
tions interested in the field and responds to over 500 requests for in-
formation each month.
LEAA is working closely with other Federal departments and
agencies in implementing domestic violence programs. I have al-
ready mentioned our joint effort with the Community Services Ad-
ministration. We participate in the Interdepartmental Committee on
Domestic Violence formed by the President this year.
LEAA personnel are also working with the staff of HEW's Office
of Domestic Violence on several collaborative efforts. That office may
join us in sponsoring the clearinghouse and newsletter of the Center
for Women Policy Studies. A coordinated government response to
domestic violence should increase the effectiveness of all agency
programs.
The LEAA family violence program has demonstrated to the States
the need for more effective responses to the problem. More and more
jurisdictions are moving to initiate projects relating to domestic vio-
lence, spouse abuse and child abuse and neglect with LEAA subgrants.
The types of programs vary widely. Kingstown, R.I., is using funds to
provide in-service training on family crisis intervention for police
PAGENO="0197"
191
officers. Newark, Ohio, is sponsoring a night prosecutor program to
help resolve family disputes in a nonjiidicial setting. New York City
is using funds to provide services to families in crisis situations, in-
cluding legal assistance, education and vocational services, health care,.
and housing assistance.
Large and small jurisdictions are using block subgrants to support
special shelters for victims of domestic violence. These are just a few
of nearly 300 projects implemented across the country at local initia-
tive. I mention these to give you an indication, Mr. Chairman, of th~
scope of programs being used by different areas to meet their particu-
lar needs.
As you know, the United Nations has proclaimed 1979 as the Inter-
national Year of the Child. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delin-
quency Prevention at LEAA is responsible for developing and coordi-
nating all Department of Justice activities in support of the TYC..
These activities focus on four important issues, all of which are related
to family violence. These issues are-
Children a.nd youth as victims of violence;
Sexual abuse and exploitation of children and youth;
The effects of advertising and media programing on drug use and
violence among young people;
Children in custody, including the institutional placement of chil-
dren as a result of family violence.
In structuring these activities, special attention has been given to
family violence as the cause of juvenile violence, as well as the rela-
tionship between family violence and the serious problems of run-
aways, especially those runaways who become victims of sexual
exploitation.
In addition, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Preven-
tion in sponsoring and coordinating a number of activities pertain-
ing to the rights of children and youth. There are few instances when.
the protection of the rights of young people is more important than
in situations of family violence, especially when, as is too often the
case, the child is the victim or captive observer of violence.
Domestic violence is one of the most hazardous police assignments.
The outcome-not only for the disputants, but for the police as well-is
often serious injury or death. Because of the seriousness of the prob-
lem. LEAA's National Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal
Justice has supported efforts to develop improved techniques to help
police handle these problems.
The police crisis intervention program is based on established psy-
chological principles. Activities have included conceptual develop-
ment, feasibility examination, controlled experiments, intensive eval-
uation, multicity demonstration programs, and nationwide training
for police.
A major goal of the program is insuring prompt and effective police
intervention, with long-term assistance from social service agencies*
where appropriate. Reducing the immediate potential for violence
and avoidance of future violence are also priorities. Besides minimiz-
ing the possibility of serious violence, crisis intervention also prevents
a drain on police resources caused by repeated visits to troubled fami-
lies, formerly a. customary police experience.
PAGENO="0198"
192
We will be pleased at this time to answer any questions you may
have.
[The prepared statement of J. Robert Grimes follows:]
STATEMENT OF J. ROBERT GRIMES, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR, OFFIcE OF CRIMINAL
JUSTICE PROGRAM, LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for inviting me to appear today before this
Subcommittee on behalf of the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration to
discuss programs designed to prevent domestic violence and provide services to
victims of domestic violence. This is an area in which LEAA has been quite
active. I am pleased to report that the Administrator of LEAA, Mr. Henry
Dogin, has a strong personal interest in victim assistance programs, and has
given high priority to our efforts in this regard.
Family and domestic violence has become increasingly recognized as a problem
of national scope. Intra-family difficulties may manifest themselves as physical
violence against spouses or children, psychological abuse, or neglect of basic
needs.
Instances of domestic violence have become well documented in recent years
as authorities have become more sensitized to the problem. Just as it is apparent
that domestic violence takes many forms and has many implications, it is also
clear that governmental agencies and private organizations must work to develop
more effective prevention and treatment mechanisms.
LEAA recognizes that family violence is both a social and legal problem. A
cooperative community effort is essential to combatting the violence which is
present in our society today. Not only must the obvious institutions, such as the
police, prosecutors, hospitals, mental health and social service agencies be in-
volved, but so must legal and professional organizations, the media, neighbor-
hood groups, and schools. LEAA funding activities have built upon this premise.
Domestic violence programing is an area where the Federal Government can
provide important leadership. Several Federal agencies are engaged in activities
aimed at various aspects of the problem. It is satisfying to note that LEAA was
the first Federal agency to initiate a comprehensive response to domestic violence
and to have -a specifically designated national program office responsible for
addressing the problem.
THE LEAA PROGRAM
It is the mission of LEAA to provide leadership and financial and technical
assistance to state and local governments, as well as private nonprofit organiza-
tions, in order to increase their efficiency and effectiveness in dealing with crim-
inal and juvenile justice issues. LEAA is not an operational agency and does not
itself directly provide services. LEAA funds are, however, used to suppOrt the
operations of state and local agencies.
The major share of LEAA funds is distributed to the states in block grants
on the basis of population. Funds are allocated to each state contingent upon
approval by LEAA of an annual comprehensive state criminal justice plan. These
funds are subsequently awarded for individual projects through state planning
agencies which administer the program.
LEAA neither approves nor disapproves subgrant applications under the
jurisdiction of the state planning agencies. Each state makes those decisions
-on the basis of its own evaluation of needs and priorities. Projects which address
domestic violence are eligible for LEAA funding and numerous states have used
portions of their block grant funds for just that purpose.
LEAA is also authorized to award a relatively small portion of its appropria-
tion in the form of direct grants and contracts. These discretionary grants sup-
port innovative and experimental programs of national scope.
THE FAMILY VIOLENCE INITIATIVE
In the fall of 1977, LEAA announced a major new discretionary initiative
-aimed at reducing -and preventing domestic violence and sexual abuse. Subse-
quently, $1.8 million in fiscal year 1978 funds was awarded to support eleven local
demonstration projects which adopted a comprehensive approach and provided
- for the active involvement of all relevant public and private agencies.
This fiscal year, we plan to provide $1 million to an additional nine projects,
six in rural areas and three in urban jurisdictions. To provide a greater
emphasis on the domestic violence problems of the poor, the Community Services
PAGENO="0199"
193
Administration is contributing $125,000 to the Program and will join us in
supporting five of these projects.
The response to our Family Violence Program has been positive. The level
of interest is indicated by the fact that we received approximately 1,400' re~-
quests for copies of the guidelines. Formal applications were submitted by 130
organizations.
The Family Violence Program is built upon the premise that physical and
sexual assaults on family members are crimes and that the criminal justice
system therefore has an important role to play in the resolution of these prob-
lems. The program focuses on the role of the criminal justice system in prevent-
ing and controlling violent and abusive behavior in the home.
By concentrating its resources on the criminal justice system, LEAA does
not imply that the part which criminal justice agencies play in the resolution
of family violence should be expanded. Instead, we are seeking to define the
appropriate responsibilities of the criminal justice system and improve the
system's response to crimes in the home.
The approach is termed comprehensive because it foresees the need for co-
operative interaction with social service agencies and community-based groups.
The tension which normally exists between the punitive nature of the justice
system and the treatment models of the social service system must be eased in
order to meet this need.
The argument for intervention by the criminal justice system in family vio-
lence extends beyond the immediate needs of the victim for protection. Early
research suggests a correlation between the abuse of children and their sub-
sequent truancy, running away, drug and alcohol abuse, suicide, and other acts
which have the potential to lead to criminal behavior. Furthermore, some evi-
dence suggests that children who witness violence between their parents are
more apt to engage in violence themselves than children who are not subjected
to such experiences; as spouses and parents, they will become role models for
another generation of children.
BASIS FOR TIlE PROGRAM
The Family Violence Program is the outgrowth of several grants made in
earlier years under the Victim/Witness Assistance Program. Through that pro-
gram, LEAA sought to encourage local governments to improve their response
to crime victims and witnesses. Special attention was given to the victims of
rape, sexual abuse (including incest) and spousal abuse because victims seldom
reported these "sensitive crimes" and were reluctant to cooperate with authorities.
By 1977, it was clear to LEAA that the problem of spouses and children being
injured and sexually exploited by family members required new approaches.
Grants were made to two hospitals carrying on programs for sexually abused
children and four organizations providing shelter and other services for battered
women. The experiences of these projects and others like them show that the
people who come for assistance are often from families where more than one
member is being abused and needs help. The American Humane Association, in a
25-state study funded by the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
recently reported that the physical abuse of a spouse has been documented in
nearly 20 percent of all validated cases of child abuse and neglect. For this reason,
the Family Violence Program focuses on the several forms of victimization that
occur in the home, including, but not limited to, child/adolescent abuse, inter-
spousal abuse, and abuse of the elderly.
CENTER FOR WOMEN POLICY STUDIES
In June 1977. a grant was made to the Center for Women Policy Studies in
Washington, D.C., to establish a newsletter and clearinghouse for information-
sharing among people concerned with the problems of intra-family violence and
sexual assault, as well as to provide technical assistance to community groups
interested in initiating and/or improving services for victims of sensitive crime.
The grant has since been extended.
The Center sends the newsletter to 20,000 individuals and organizations inter-
ested in the field and responds to over 500 requests for information each month.
Through this grant, the Center has developed the following materials which are
available without charge:
Comprehensive bibliographies on "Child Sexual Abuse," "Domestic Violence,"
and "Spousal Abuse ;"
PAGENO="0200"
194
Guides on "Federal Funding for Family Violence," "Resources for Program.
Development," "Program Planning for Child Sexual Abuse Programs," and "In-
terviewing the Child Witness ;"
The monthly ~~e5pon5e~ newsletter on family violence issues, a well-received
and highly respected document;
A listing of contact persons for legislation in each state, and copies of enacted
and pending state legislation affecting battered women;
A listing of recommended audio-visual materials on domestic violence;
A national directory of shelters and other services, by state, including sources
of funding;
Legal memoranda to assist attorneys representing women who defend them-
selves against assault.
OTHER CURRENT ACTIVITIES
A number of other activities designed to prevent domestic violence or assist
victims are receiving direct LEAA support. These include the following:
In Brattleboro, Vermont, $91,000 has been provided for a project which pro-
vides shelter, social services, counseling, and criminal justice advocacy to women~
in a rural area;
In New York City, the Family Abuse Project is utilizing a $148,000 award to
provide assistance to victims of family abuse at the intake and assessment stage
of the Family Court process;
Alaska has received $261,000 to implement a statew-ide Family Violence Pro-
grain which services eight communities, some extremely isolated.
In Miami, Florida, $167,000 has been awarded to the Domestic Violence Vic-
tims Assistance Program, which provides shelter care and other services to the
victims of family violence;
The National Association of Counties has held three meetings to provide
training to rural planners interested in family violence programs;
In early May, a National Symposium on Services for the Battering Spouse
was held in Belmont, Maryland; this w-ill result in a major publication giving
guidance to program personnel;
In September of 1978, a national meeting for district attorneys was held in
Memphis, Tennessee, on "The Role of the Prosecutor in Family Violence :"
A grant to the Police Executive Research Forum will result in development
of a monograph on "Improving Police Practices in Dealing with Family
Violence ;"
The Center for the Family of the American Home Economics Association is
utilizing LEAA funds to develop family violence educational materials.
Two additional projects receiving LEAA support are aimed at assisting the
victims of child sexual abuse:
In Seattle, Washington, $256,000 has been aw-arded for the Harborview Hos-
pital Sexually Abused Child-Victim/Witness Project to aid in the provision df
assistance to the victim and his or her family, as well as to help improve police
and prosecution handling of these cases: the project has resulted in development
of a training film entitled "Double Jeopardy" which is used to provide on-site
technical assistance to grantees and others;
In Washington, D.C., the Children's Hospital Child Sexual Abuse Victim As-
sistance Project is using a $316000 award to improve the management of child
victims by medical, legal, and social service organizations.
INTERAGENCY COOPERATION
LEAA is working closely with other Federal departments and agencies in
implementing domestic violence programs. I have already mentioned our joint
effort with the Community Services Administration. We participate in the Inter-
departmental Committee on Domestic Violence formed by the President this year.
LEAA personnel are also working with the staff of HEW's Office of Domestic
Violence on several collaborative efforts. That Office may join us in sponsoring
the clearinghouse and newsletter of the Center for Women Policy Studies. A
coordinated government response to domestic violence should increase the effec-
tiveness of all agency programs.
BLOCK GRANT PROGRAMS
The LEAk Family Violence Program has demonstrated to the states the need
for more effective responses to the problem. More and more jurisdictions are mov-
ing to initiate projects relating to domestic violence, spouse abuse, and child abuse
PAGENO="0201"
195
and neglect with LEAA subgrants. The types of programs vary widely. Kingstown,
Rhode Island, is using funds to provide in-service training on family crisis inter-
vention for police officers. Newark, Ohio, is sponsoring a night prosecutor pro-
gram to help resolve family disputes in a non-judicial setting. New York City
is using funds to provide services to families in crisis situations, including legal
Hssistance, educational and vocational services, health care, and housing assist-
ance. Large and small jurisdictions are using block subgrants to support special
shelters for victims of domestic violence. These are just a few of nearly 300
projects implemented across the country at local initiative. I mention these to
give you an indication, Mr. Chairman, of the scope of programs being used by
different areas to meet their particular needs.
THE OFFICE OF JUVENILE JUSTICE AND DELINQUENCY PREVENTION AND THE
INTERNATIONAL YEAR OF THE CHILD
As you know, the TJnited Nations has proclaimed 1079 as the International Year
of the Child. The Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention at LEAA
is responsible for developing and coordinating all Department of Justice activities
in support of the IYC. These activities focus on four important issues, all of which
are related to family violence. These issues are:
Children and youth as victims of violence;
Sexual abuse and exploitation of children and youth;
The effects of advertising and media programming on drug use and violence
among young people;
Children in custody, including the institutional placement of children as a
result of family violence.
In structuring these activities, special attention has been given to family vio-
lence as the cause of juvenile violence, as well as the relationship between family
violence and the serious problems of runaways, especially those runaways who
become victims of sexual exploitation. In addition, the Office of Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention is sponsoring and coordinating a numl)er of activities
pertaining to the rights of children and youth. There are few instances when the
protection of the rights of young people is more important than in situations of
family violence, especially when, as is too often the case, the child is the victim
or captive observer of violence.
In response to a legislative mandate in the 1977 Amendments to the Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1974 to conduct assessments in the
areas of family violence, the Office, in conjunction with the National Institute of
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice is developing an evaluation of the Family
Violence Program. Initially, an assessment of existing knowledge regarding the
nature extent, and methods of treatment of family violence was conducted. Based
on this assessment, the dimensions of family violence programs are being identi-
fied and local projects evaluated. The evaluation is looking at the effectiveness of
a community-wide, multi-agency approach to the prevention and treatment of
family violence. The extent to which individual programs achieve the objectives
of reducing community acceptance of intra-family violence, providing services to
families involved in domestic violence, and coordinating justice and social service
agencies will be documented.
POLICE CRISIS INTERVENTION
Domestic violence is one of the most hazardous police assignments. The out-
come-not only for the disputants, but for the police as well-is often serious
injury or even death. Because of the seriousness of the problem, LEAA's National
Institute of Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice has supported efforts to
develop improved techniques to help police handle these problems.
The Police Crisis Intervention Program is based on established psychological
principles. Activities have included conceptual development, feasibility examina-
tion, controlled experiments, intensive evaluation, multi-city demonstraiton pro-
grams. and nationwide training for police.
A major goal of the program is insuring prompt and effective police interven-
* tion, with long-term assistance from social service agencies where appropriate.
Reducing the immediate potential for violence and avoidance of future violence
are also priorities. Besides minimizing the possibility of serious violence, crisis
intervention also prevents a drain on police resources caused by repeated visits to
troubled families, formerly a customary police experience.
* With Institute support, police have been trained in a wide variety of alter-
native solutions that promise to be more effective in keeping peace than the tra-
PAGENO="0202"
196
*ditional responses of no action or arrest. At the same time, however, theprograin
recognizes that in some cases, arrest is the proper and most effective course of:
action.
One of the Institute's first series of workshops in Police Training for Family-
Crisis Thtervention was presented to 600 police officials from across the country
in 1974. In a follow-up assessment, 63 percent of the respondents reported that,
as a result of the workshop, their agencies had elements of family crisis inter-
vention planned or underway.
Seven states reported that, based on their experiences in the workshop, they
were incorporating Family Crisis Intervention into their state standards-the
guidelines mandating training requirements for police officers. In 1974, the In-
stitute also funded demonstration programs in six cities. The sites, all of w-hich
have incorporated the program permanently into their activities, have held con-
ferences for other police officials in their state, trained officers from other depart-
ments, and conducted training at regional academies using LEAA materials.
The Institute training materials have also been used by the National Council
of Christians and Jews for a Family Crisis Intervention Seminar in California
and Kansas; by the Southwestern Illinois Law Enforcement Commission for
conferences and small group training; and by Harvard's John F. Kennedy School
of Government in its training for newly-elected mayors.
In early 1977, the MITRE Corporation surveyed all police departments in the
country with 100 or more officers and serving communities of 25,000 or more in
population. Seventy-one percent of all responding agencies had crisis interven-
tion training programs in place and operational. An additional eight percent
reported plans to establish programs. Programs to help alleviate intra-family-
violence are now operating in more than 200 cities and benefit some 30 million
persons.
THE COMMUNITY ANTICRIME PROGRAM
LEAA's Community Anti-Crime Program is a potential source of funding for-
programs related to domestic violence, although it is not geared directly toward
providing funds for services to battered family members. The purpose of this:
program is to assist non-profit community organizations and neighborhood groups.
to involv~e citizen.s in crime prevention and neighborhood revitalization.
Mr. Chairman, I have brought with me for the information of the Subcommittee
samples of the domestic violence documents published and disseminated with
LEAA support. I am accompanied by Jeannie Niedermeyer Santos, Program.
Manager of the Family Violence Program. I trust that our presentation will assist~
you in your deliberations regarding domestic violence legislation. At this time.
we would be pleased to respond to any questions you might have.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you for your testimony.
Again I think your testinaony like that of the previous witness from.
the administration indicates that there are ongoing programs already
addressing this problem. You were here when I made my statement to
Ms. Ramirez. My .concern is that of a technical assistance program.
You `have a clearinghouse program. ACTION has a technical assist-
ance program. There is talk of another clearinghouse program being -
set up within HEW.
My concern is whether or not we are just wasting a lot of people's
time doing that, assuming some level of sophistication on the part of*
local people. Obviously people have come to you. They have responded
to your call for grants. You said you got 1,300 inquiries for guidelines
and local organizations have put together proposals that you haxe
found acceptable, some to do with research, some to do with direct
delivery of service, some to work in terms of diversion and other
programs.
I am delighted. I am a little concerned that in trying to create the
illusion of action and appearance, that we are diverting from your
activity. I don't think we ought to take lots of people's time out of your -
agency to sit down with the Coordinating Council to coordinate what.
PAGENO="0203"
197
you are already doing. If they want to borrow it or there is some reason
to duplicate, that is a different issue.
I don't think they have the problem of asking LEAA for technical
assistance or ACTION for technical assistance. It may be inadequate.
That is a different issue.
If your technical assistance isn't good that is a different issue. I don't
see any reason to believe that a new one will be that much better that
we in fact have one-stop shopping because after you shop there you
have a handbook.
I don't think that is the goal. Let me ask you, what has been done in
terms of dissemination of the information that you are coming across
with the 11 demonstration projects and with the other grant projects?
How is that being pulled together for the benefit of not only the
Congress but also people who are working in the field because again
we have heard a substantial amount of concern about research,
whether it is centrally structured or whether it is diversified out in the
field, and again whether we are going over the same ground.
Ms. NEIDERMEYER-SANTOS. Our newsletter goes to 20,000 communi-
ties now. It is growing all the time. It is our main vehicle for getting
the word out. We don't have complete documents printed in the news-
letter but it alerts interested communities about the availability of
information. They can write and get the full document. We are reach-
ing a wide group through this newsletter. It has been in existence for
over 2 years.
That is one way of reaching people. We also have a national evalua-
tion of our family violence projects. As soon as the findings are avail-
able on that evaluation, they will be reported in the newsletter and
made available.
Mr. MILLER. Can you give me the status of the 11 demonstration
projects? On page 3 you describe the $1.8 million in 1978?
Ms. NEIDERMEYER-SANTOS. They are still in their first year of
operation. We hope we are going to be able to continue the second or
third year.
Mr. MILLER. Can you describe the 11 projects generally? Are they
located in shelters? Are they in mental health communities or local
governments?
Ms. NEIDERMEYER-SANTOS. We opened our applications to any pub-
lic or private agency. We have a broad range of projects. Some of
them are county government. One grant goes to the YWCA. One goes
to a court. We have not limited who the applicants can be. The projects
all share a similar model which requires coordination of all the rele-
vant public and private agencies. Each one of these applicants had to
have letters of support and letters of commitment from all of the
relevant public and private agencies, police, prosecutors, welfare de-
partments, shelters, and community groups.
Before each grant was ever awarded, a network had been established
in that local community. We also encouraged them to begin looking
for broad-based financial support. Sometimes that occurred, sometimes
it didn't. They all had to come up with a 10-percent match. We alerted
them that they would have to look for a wide base of support because
our commitment was for 3 years.
PAGENO="0204"
198
Mr. MILLER. Are these local governments who received these 11
grants? Are they shelters? Are they nonprofit organizations? Who are
the recipients?
Ms. NEIDERMEYER-SANTOS. In Gary, md., the Commission on
Women is the grantee. In Wilmington, Del., it is the YWCA.
In Salem, Mass., it is a private wornen~s community group. In Miami,
Fla., it is a prosecutor. Regardless of who the grantee is, the concept
is that it is a community project with the involvement of several
agencies.
Many of these ~rojects, because we try to get them to involve
several agencies, work on a contracting basis. They will contract part
of the funds for a shelter or a hot line and that also involves other
agencies financially.
Mr. MILLER. I think it was in looking at the child abuse cases, you
found that in 20 percent of the cases another member of the family
was abused. Is that an ongoing study?
Ms. NEIDERMEYER-SANTOS. That is an ongoing study in abuse and
neglect by HEW. Those are actual reports. They are not projections.
Where a child has been found to be abused, they are asking if there
is anybody else in the family who hase been abused. In 20 percent of
the cases they actually found abuse.
Mr. MILLER. Do you think LEAk has helped with the law enforce-
ment community in terms of changing some of their attitudes in terms
of sentencing-
Ms. NEIDERMEYER-SANTOS. I do. I will tell you one way we have
had a real impacL When we can provide funds to the community and
pay for an additional prosecutor, that prosecutor will start handling
cases differently. The availability of resources to these agencies is
critical to their changing their practices in these cases.
Mr. GRIMES. Philosophically, police departments, have not sup-
ported that type of activity. But they have been won over by the argu-
ment that these practices will dramatically reduce injuries to
themselves.
Mr. MILLER. My personal experience with the police I have talked
to and the time I have spent riding with them and discussing the prob-
lems is that most of them just overwhelmingly hope that the shelter
will be created in their area or the one that is there that is hanging on
by a~ thin string will stay because it gives them an alternative to the
appearance of callousness.
It provides some other mechanism for them.
Thank you for your testimony and for your help in what we are
trying to do here in the committee.
Mr. GRIMES Thank you.
Mr. MILLER. Next the committee will hear from Freda Na.zeer who
is here representing the General Federation of Women's Clubs.
STATEMENT OF FREDA NAZEER, DIRECTOR, LEGISLATION AND
RESEARCH, GENERAL FEDERATION OF WOMEN'S CLUBS (ON
BEHALF OF MRS. QUINT)
Ms. NAZEER. Mr. Chairman, I am Freda Nazeer, I am Director of
Legislation and Research of the General Federation of Women's Clubs.
I am speaking in behalf of our international president, Mrs. A. M.
PAGENO="0205"
199
Quint. We apologize once again to the chairman of the committee for
being late. However, it was unavoidable.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you and the subcommittee for
allowing us the opportunity to testify before you this morning regard-
ing domestic violence. Rather than repeating what has been said by
other witnesses as to the need of shelters, special programs and legisla-
tion, I have with me our deputy director of the Hands Up crime reduc-
tion program of the General Federation of Women's Clubs who will
describe some of our ongoing community programs in the area of
abuse.
The General Federation of Women's Clubs wishes to make the
Subcommittee on Select Education aware of its policy regarding the
proposed legislation on Domestic Violence-H.R. 2977.
Presenting as testimony the resolutions adopted by our delegates in
convention from the years 1950-1975:
The first resolution on family violence reads as follows: Whereas,
Family violence in the United States is widespread, cutting across age,
ethnic, racial, educational, and socio-economic lines, resulting in physi-
cal abuse and deaths within the family and among law enforcement
officials responding to situations of domestic violence; and
Whereas, Family violence is a cause of emotional and behavioral dis-
turbance in children and adults, and battering and battered spouses
often batter their children who, in turn, become violent adults, thus
perpetuating the cycle; and
1,Vhereas, Since few States have effective laws on family violence, a
clearly-formulated national policy on family violence is essential; and
Whereas, There is a need for emergency shelters for victims of f am-
ily violence; therefOre
Resolved, That the General Federation of 1\Tomen's Clubs shall ini-
tiate and actively support legislation and programs which wi 11:
1. Identify violence-prone families and suspected cases of child abuse
and battered spouses;
2. Provide emergency aid and shelter for those who are forced to
leave violent family settings; and
3. Provide treatment for victims and perpetrators of family vio-
lence; and further
Resolved, That the General Federation of Women's Clubs will en-
list the help of hospitals, doctors, lawyers, police, churches, counseling
services, and clinics in a united effort for prevention and treatment of
family violence.
Other CFWG resolutions are in regard to the issue of abuse and
sex offenses.
The 600,000 members of the General Federation of Women's Clubs
through community programs have been credited by the American
Library Association with the establishment of 75 percent of U.S. pub-
lic libraries, an area which has contributed largely to community
awareness. Because, it seems by previous statements that awareness
and recognition of abuse cannot or has not been defined.
Therefore, community awareness is essential.
The members of the General Federation of Women's Clubs have also
worked for causes such as: enactment of the 8-hour workday, first child
labor law, creation of the Food and Drug Administration, establish-
ment of the Women's Bureau, improvement of standards for education,
49-914----79-----14
PAGENO="0206"
200
campaigns for cancer detection, consumer protection legislation, Co-
operative Forest Management Act, equal rights and responsibilities
for women, promotion of international peace, Workmen's Compensa-
tion Act, Energy and natural resources conservation, crime reduction,
responsible metha, juvenile justice, Uniform Probate Code, safety, pro-
tection of children, human rights, balanced Federal budget, election
reform, right to work, the family, protection of private enterprise sys-
tem, health, betterment of life for older Americans and
communications.
I would now like to introduce Mrs. Fa.ye Warren, the General Fed-
eration of Women's Club's Deputy Director for the Hands Up
program.
STATEMENT OF FAYE WARREN, THE GENERAL FEDERATION OP
WOMEN'S CLUBS, DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR THE HANDS UP
PROGRAM
Mrs. WARREN. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee. On
behalf of the General Federation of Women's Glubs, I wish to express
our appreciation for this opportunity to testify before you today on
the subject of domestic violence.
Bather than reiterate the specifics of the pending bills or speak to
the problem of battered spouses, I wish to inform you of action in the
domestic violence area initiated by the General Federation of Women's
Clubs through its Hands Up crime reduction/prevention program
funded by LEAA and the private sector.
The goals of the Hands Up program are to increase national aware-
ness of the citizen's role in crime reduction and to encourage the forma-
tion of local action groups to recommend and carry out projects to
reduce or prevent crime. The goals are accomplished by the developing
of coalition, establishing a network of community-based projects to
impact on crime, and by motivation and refinement of projects in the
following emphasis areas: personal and domestic violence, youth-
related programs, economic loss, property and personal loss, justice
for juveniles, offenders and court-related programs.
Action in domestic violence began in 1976 when members of the fed-
eration demonstrated their growing interest in domestic violence with
their willingness to serve as catalysts within their communities to work
with the existing structure forming coalitions with other volunteer
organizations and professional agencies, sponsoring educational semi-
nars, establishing shelters, lending assistance in fundraising for
shelters and serving as advocates for existing programs and other
service/issues relating to domestic violence. These projects were im-
plemented regardless of availability of funds.
The Hands Up/crime reduction program now in its 4th year of oper-
ation selected domestic violence as one of thte seven emphasis areas for
1978-80. A booklet was produced which you have in your packet, which
is utilized by federated clubs and by other organizations and agencies.
A workshop on domestic and personal violence was held and attended
by coordinators of community projects, chairmen of statewide pro-
grams, and specialists in the field.
The junior club members, approximately 75,000 members. selected
abused persOns as their priority for the 1978-80 administration thus
PAGENO="0207"
201
strengthening the existing hands up program. This project not only
deals with battered spouses, child abuse and neglect but also with abuse
of the elderly and the handicapped.
We are aware of resources and technical assistance available through
existing agencies, such as: HEW's Child Abuse and Neglect Regional
Centers, and ACTION's Technical Assistance Centers on Domestic
Violence. The national HANDS UP office works with these offices, and
local project coordinators rely upon Federal, State and local agencies
to implement their projects. We also work with the Center for Women
Policy Studies and utilize some of the materials from the LEAA
office.
The basic strength of the General Federation of Women's Clubs is
the 12,000 plus local clubs and the expertise they exercise in com~
munity development. The clubwomen are most cognizant of the need
to avoid duplication of efforts, as well as the necessity of completing
a needs assessment to ascertain where they can best fit an unmet need~
Their expertise in coalition-building has been felt in local com-
munities where they have developed a broader range of community
services, based on multiple organizations/agencies pooling their re-
sources. These methods have been used in the service-delivery area of
domestic violence in many coimnunities. Examples of projects are at-V
tached and one rural domestic violence project will be reported.
You do have attached to the testimony examples of projects. These
are just a few examples of the projects we do have documented in our
office. I would like to read to you the one from the Golden Beach
Women's Club in Maryland.
The Junior Women's Club of Golden Beach initiated their project to assist fe-
male victims of domestic violence and their children in a rural area. Their county,
in 1973, led the Nation in assaults per capita and the number of spouse abuse
incidents is estimated to be 500 per year.
The rate and type of incidents were investigated by the club in order to educate
the public about the problem and to establish the need for a shelter. Contact was
made with all agencies which were already serving or could potentially serve the
victims in some way to determine what services they could provide. The project,
then, tied into an existing hot line facility and lined up support services. In addi-
tion, a booklet was published on how to avoid violence and how to find help. Their
shelter concept is unique, in that it utilizes a series of motels in which to house
the battered woman and her children. After a few days they leave the motel and
move in with "caring or foster" families. During this period, support services are
provided to the woman. These include counseling financial aid, job training or
placement, legal advice, et cetera. If the woman attempts to make it on her own,
more assistance may be provided in the form of a security deposit in order to
rent an apartment. Each woman is asked to sign a paper stating that, if possible,
she will repay moneys which have been laid out on her behalf. To date, over
80 percent of those women assisted by the project have repaid these funds!
The shelter program now has a CETA coordinator. County funding has been
received and they are now sharing a 3-year $50,000 LEAA grant.
In our project we have a number of States that have implemented
statewide programs on domestic violence, working usually with the
State university and State Department Human Resources Protective
Services. North Carolina is one example. That is a 2-year program
dealing with child abuse.
Another approach developed by the HANDS UP program to moti-
vate clubs to implement projects and refine existing ones is through the
use. of voluntee.r technical assistants. Twenty volunteer technical assist-
ants-VTA's-have been selected for the seven emphasis areas, includ-
PAGENO="0208"
202
ing domestic violence. Six clubwomen are now serving as YTA's, utiliz-
ing their field experience to train other federated members.
The national networking of crime reduction/prevention projects
within the HANDS UP program is the key to our success in project
development. The sharing of ideas, programs, failures, and successes
has proven to be a major motivating factor for many well established
community-based projects. This networking is done through docu-
mentation of the local projects received in the national HANDS UP
office based in Washington, D.C. We have become the conduit for fun-
neling information to other communities.
This brief capsule of activities within the General Federation of
Women's Clubs was presented to impress upon you the energy, re-
sources, motivation, and most of all, the concern of dedicated volun-
teers, especially those volunteers involved in domestic violence. They
recognize the need to coordinate their efforts-and resources-with
those of the social service providers, as well as the criminal justic.e
system.
Much of these activities, National, State, and local were initiated
through direct volunteer involvement, and, on occasion, local and pri-
vate sector funds were made available for community project imple-
mentation. Tn-kind services provided by professionals and specialists
also played an important part in these activities. However, t.he availa.-
bility of "seed money" for local domestic violence programs could be
a consideration in reducing time expended by both professionals and
volunteers in searching for funds to allow for development of more
sophisticated community projects.
Thank you.
[The prepared statements of Mrs. Quint and Mrs. Warren follows:]
HOUSE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, SUBCOMMITTEE ON SELECT
EDUCATION, HEARING ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you and the Subcommittee for allowing
us the opportunity to testify before you this morning regarding Domestic Vio-
lence. Rather than repeating what has been said by other witnesses as to the
need of shelters, special programs and legislation, I have with me our Deputy
Director of the Hands Up Crime Reduction Program of the General Federation
of Women's Clubs who will describe some of our on-going community programs
in the area of "abuse."
The General Federation of Women's Clubs wishes to make the Subcommittee
on Select Education aware of its policy regarding the proposed legislation on
Domestic Violence-HR. 2977.
Presenting as testimony the Resolutions adopted by our delegates in conven-
tion from the years 1950-75:
GFWC's Resolution on Family T7iolence (Convention .1978)
Whereas, family violence in the United States is widespread, cutting across
age, ethnic, racial, educational, and socioeconomic lines, resulting in physical
abuse and deaths within the family and among law enforcement officials respond-
ing to situations of domestic violence; and
Whereas, family violence is a cause of emotional and behavioral disturbance in
children and adults and battering and battered spouses often batter their chil-
dren who, in turn, become violent adults, thus perpetuating the cycle; and
Whereas since few states have effective laws on family violence, a clearly-
formulated national policy on family violence is essential; and
Whereas, there is .a need for emergency shelters for victims of family violence;
therefore
ResoTved, That the General Federation of Women's Clubs shall initate and
actively support legislation and programs which
PAGENO="0209"
203
1. Identify violence-prone families and suspected cases of child abuse and
battered spouses;
2. Provide emergency aid and shelter for those who are forced to leave
violent family settings; and
3. Provide treatment for victims and perpetrators of family violence; and
further
Resolved, That the General Federation of Women's Clubs will enlist the help
of hospitals, doctors, lawyers, police, churches, counselling services, and clinics
in a united effort for prevention and treatment of family violence.
Other GFWC resolution regarding the issue of "abuse" are:
Sexual Exploitation of Children (Convention 1978)
Whereas sexual exploitation of children may cause permanent psychological
and physiological damage; and
Whereas sexually abused children may become sexually-abusive adults; and
Whereas many sexually-exploited children, as young as eight years old, are
runaways; and others even as young as three years old, are provided by their
parents or guardians for sexual exploitations; and still others are victims of in-
cestuous relationships; and
Whereas, the billion-dollar pornography industry's newest growth area is child
pornography; and
Whereas, children are not always capable of protecting themselves from sexual
exploitation; therefore
Resolved, That the General Federation of Women's Clubs shall study and de-
mand enforcement of existing laws concerning, sexual abuse and exploitation of
children and actively initiate and support new legislation where needed; and fur-
ther
Resolved, That the General Federation of Women's Clubs urges the adoptioa
of laws which will provide that any proven involvement with the production and
sales of explicit sex pictures of minor children, or the use of children in live per-
formances exhibiting sexually-explicit conduct or for the purposes of prostitution,
shall be considered a felony with mandatory minimum prison sentences and fines
for convicted individuals.
Child Abuse (Convention 1.975)
Whereas reports indicate that as many as 60,000 children are abused each year
in the United States; and
Whereas although there are state laws requiring reporting of suspected child
abuse, often the child has been permanently injured or killed before the incident
has been reported; and
Whereas efforts are being made to determine the causes of child abuse; and
Whereas the Congress of the United States has adopted legislation intended
to provide preventive, protective, and supportive services for parents and chil-
dren; therefore
Resolved, That the General Federation of Women's Clubs urges its member
clubs to become involved in providing educational programs and rehabilitative
services related to child abuse.
*War Against Rape (Convention 1975)
Whereas according to FBI reports, it is estimated that only 14 percent of
forcible rape is reported, and only half of these reported rapes result in arrest
and of those, only one-third are convicted of the actual crime; and
Whereas the failure to provide an adequate criminal justice system leading to
the conviction of rapists erodes the deterrent effect of existing laws regardless of
the severity of their penalties, that is, the degree of punishment for the crime
makes no difference if the offender has every reason to expect that there is little
chance that he will be arrested and convicted; and
Whereas unless a full scale effort is made to encourage reporting and obtain
convicitions, there is little hope of establishing a deterrent to the most fre-
quently committed violent crime in our streets and homes today; and
Whereas according to law enforcement administrators and sociologists, this
violent crime against the person is the most under-reported due primarily to fear
and embarrassment on the part of the victim; and
Whereas, the fear of degradation, embarrassment and shame which discour-
ages the reporting of these offenses is, in part, caused by our criminal justice sys-
tem which fails to deal with this psychological reality and, therefore, fails to
bring the criminal to justice; therefore
PAGENO="0210"
204
Resolved, That the General Federation of Women's Clubs urges its members to
work for a comprehensive rape reporting and conviction program to deal with
the rapid increase of forcible, statutory and attempted rapes and other sexual
assaults, specifically:
*$a~eguar~ing the American Home (Convention 1963)
Whereas, Irresponsible, incompetent and dangerously unqualified marriage
counseling threatens the American home, therefore
Resolved, That the General Federation of Women's Clubs urges its member
clubs to promote a survey of the conditions existing in their communities relative
to marriage counseling services and to work for statewide regulations requiring
high standards in the areas where needed.
*Se~-j. Offenders (Convention 1950)
Whereas there is an alarming increase in the number of sex offenses, and
many states and communities lack adequate laws, personnel, and facilities to
cope with this menacing situation; therefore
Resolved, That the General Federation of Women's Clubs advocates the promo-
tion of an educational campaign which will lead to the enactment of adequate
state statutes providing longer sentences for sex offenders, particularly adult
offenders, and strengthened medical and psychiatric treatment for both adult
and youthful offenders until such time as they might safely be returned to so-
ciety, and for the permanent detention of those found incurable.
The 600,000 members of the General Federation of Women's Clubs through
community programs have been credited by the American Library Association
with the establishment of 75 percent of U.S. public libraries, an area which has
contributed largely to community awareness. Because, it seems by previous
statements that awareness and recognition of "abuse" cannot or has not been
defined. Therefore, community awareness is essential.
The members of the General Federation of Women's Clubs have also worked
for causes such as:
Enactment of the 8-hour workday, First child labor law, Creation of the Food
*and Drug Administration, Establishment of the Women's Bureau, Improvement of
standards for education, Campaigns for cancer detection, Consumer protection
legislation, Cooperative Forest Management Act, Equal Rights and Responsi-
~sibilities for Women, Promotion of international peace, Workmen's Compensation
- Act, Energy and natural resource conservation, Crime reduction, Responsible
-.:media, Juvenire justice, Uniform Probate Code, Safety, Protection of Children,
~Human Rights, Balanced Federal Budget, Election Reform, Right to Work, The
- family, Protection of private enterprise system, Health, Betterment of life for
.older Americans, and Communications.
I would like now to introduce Mrs. Faye Warren, th~ General Federation of
-Women's Clubs' Deputy Director for the Hands Up Program.
PREPARED STATEMENT OF FAYE WARREN, DEPUTY DmECTOR, HANDS U~ PROGRAM
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee. On behalf of the General
Federation of Women's Clubs, I wish to express our appreciation for this oppor-
tunity to testify before you today on the subject of domestic violence.
Rather than reiterate the specifics of the pending bills or speak to the problem
of battered spouses, I wish to inform you of action in the domestic violence ar~ea
initiated by the General Federation of Women's Clubs through its Hands Up
Crime Reduction/Prevention Program. The goals of the Hands Up Program
are to increase national awareness of the citizen's role in crime reduction and
to encourage the formation of local action groups to recommend and carry out
proj~cts to reduce or prevent crime. The goals are accomplished by the developing
of coalitions, establishing a network of community community-based projects
to impact on crime and by motivation and refinement of projects in the following
emphasis areas: Personal and Domestic Violence, Youth-Related Programs,
Economic Loss, Property and Personal Loss, Justice for Juveniles, Offenders and
Court-Related Programs.
Action in domestic violence began in 1976 when members of the Federation
tlemonstrated their growing interest in domestic violence with their wi11ingn~ess to
serve as catalysts within their communities to work with the existing structure
forming coalitions with other volunteer organizations and professional agencies,
sponsoring educational seminars, estah1~shing shelters. lending assistance in fund
raising for shelters and serving as advocates for existing programs: and other
PAGENO="0211"
205
services/issues relating to domestic violence. These projects were implemented
regardless of availability of funds.
The Hands Up/Crime Reduction Program now in its 4th year of operation
selected Domestic Violence as one of the seven emphasis areas for 1978-80. A
booklet was produced which is utilized by federated clubs and by other organiza-
tions and agencies. A workshop on Domestic and Personal Violence was held and
attended by coordinators of community projects, chairmen of statewide programs,
and specialists in the field. The Junior Club members, approximately 75,000
members, selected Abused Persons as their priority for the 1978-80 administra-
tion; thus strengthening the existing Hands Up Program. This project not only
deals with battered spouses, Child Abuse and Neglect but also with abuse of the
elderly and the handicapped.
We are aware of resources and technical assistance available through existing
agencies, such as: HEW's Child Abuse and Neglect Regional Centers, and
ACTION'S Technical Assistance Centers on Domestic Violence. The national
Bands Up office works with these offices, and local project coordinators rely upon
federal, state and local agencies to implement their projects.
The basic strength of the General Federation of Women's Clubs is the 12,000+
local clubs and the expertise they exercise in community development. The club-
women are most cognizant of the need to avoid duplication of efforts, as well
as the necessity of completing a needs assessment to ascertain where they can
best fit an unmet need. Their expertise in coalition-building has been felt in local
communities where they have developed a broader range of community services,
based on multiple organizations/agencies pooling their resources. These methods
have been used in the service-delivery area of Domestic Violence in many
communities.
Examples of projects are attached and one rural domestic violence project will
be reported.
Another approach developed by the Hands Up Program to motivate clubs to
implement projects and refine existing ones is through the use of Volunteer
Technical Assistants. Twenty Volunteer Technical Assistants (VTAs) have been
selected for the seven emphasis areas, including Domestic Violence. Six club-
women are now serving as VTA's, utilizing their field experience to train other
federated members.
The national networking of Crime Reduction/Prevention projects within the
Hands Up Program is the key to our success in project development. The sharing
of ideas, programs, failures and successes has proven to be a major motivating
-factor for many well established community-based projects. This networking
~is done through documentation of the local projects received in the national
Hands Up office. We have become the conduit for funneling information to other
communities.
This brief capsule of activities within the General 13~ederation of Women's
Clubs was presented to impress upon you the energy, resources, motivation
-and most of all, the concern of dedicated volunteers, especially those volunteers
involved in Domestic Violence. They recognize the need to coordinate their efforts
(and resources) with those of the social service providers, as well as the
criminal justice system.
Much of these activities, national, state and local were initiated through direct
-volunteer involvement, and, on occasion, local and private sector funds were made
available for community project implementation. In-kind services were provided
by professionals and specialists also played an important part in these activities.
However, the availability of "seed money" for local domestic violence programs
-could be a consideration in reducing time expended by both professionals and
-volunteers in searching for funds to allow for development of more sophisticated
community projects.
Thank you.
PROTECT-CHILD ABUSE AND NRGLECT (CA/N) NORTH CAROLINA
Project Descri~ption.-Mrs. Robert Bridges, NC Hands Up Chairman is a
-member of the NC Child Abuse and Neglect Program Advocacy Committee, and
strengthened this role by marshalling the forces of the North Carolina Federa-
tion of Women's Clubs (NCFWO) to implement a statewide attack on this pro-
gram, effective April, 1978. This has been a good example of how the state
~federation can utilize their chain of command and communication to saturate a
specific target area. In September (1978) the NCFWC and the Committee co-
PAGENO="0212"
206
sponsored a State Conference on Child Abuse, attended by 150 citizens, special-
ists and government officials from throughout North Carolina.
This was later followed by special CA/N Workshops at the NCFWC Conven-
tion, Summer Councils, Board of Directors and District meetings. District Public
Affairs Chairmen and state leaders received CA/N materials from the national
Hands Up office and' the NC Protective Services for Children. Each Junior club
was requested to augment a State Child Abuse Resource Directory with input
from their local community.
Local projects established as a result of this program emphasis would include
Crisis Nurseries for abused children, as well as permanent and temporary shel-
ters for the target population.
* Support for the new Child Abuse Legislation was evident when clubwomen's
presence was felt at each of the 37 public hearings held by the Governor of
North Carolina, James B. Hunt, Jr. On a local level, NC clubwomen have devel-
oped their political clout with their own legislators, working toward community
improvement for all North Carolinians.
Contact: Mrs. Robert T. Bridges, Hands Up Chairman, 2606 Duck Club Road,
Greensboro, N.C.
PROJECT-FAMILY ABUSE AND NEGLECT PREVENTION AND EDUCATION PROGRAM
Project Description-The Iowa Federation of Women's Clubs initiated their
project first to educate our club members to the domestic violence problem and
then to begin to study their communities to see what is already being done to
correct the problem and then to become involved in areas in which they could
help. We started off the first year stressing child abuse and neglect. This year
we plan tO begin to study the spouse abuse problem. This project has been com-
mitted to a state wide effort for four years (two administrations). However, if
at that time it is felt that we have only begun to touch the problem, it will be
proposed as a continued project. We have one district of our Federation that is
working to help the girls and boys in a reformatory during their stay and
working to make them better able to return to the mainstream of life. We also
have started working with our state women's penitentiary. We will be trans-
porting children to visit their mothers there, supplying craft items, etc. and
becoming involved personally better to prepare them to return to outside life.
We feel that this ties in with our project as these people have frequently been
abused persons or have abused others.
We feel that if we can get our 22,000 members involved, we can make a differ-
ence in this problem.
Contact: Mrs. James D. Miller, 810 5th Ave. S., Clinton, Iowa.
PROJECT-BATTERED SpousEs-JUNIOR WOMAN'S CLUB OF GOLDEN BEACIT, MD.
Project Description-The Junior Woman's Club of Golden Beach initiated
their project to assist female victims of domestic violence and their children in
a rural area. Their county. in 1973, led the nation in assaults per capita and the
number of spouse abuse incidents is estimated to be 500 per year.
The rate and type of incidents were investigated by the club in order to educate
the public about the problem and to establish the need for a shelter. Contact
was made with all agencies which were already serving or could potentially serve
the victims in some way to determinewhat services they could provide. The proj-
ect. then, tied into an existing hot line facility and lined up support services. In
addition, a booklet was published on how to avoid violence and how to find help.
Their shelter concept is unique in that it utilizes a series of motels in which to
house the battered woman and her children. After a few days they leave the
motel and move in with "caring or foster" families. During this period. sunport
services are provided to the woman. These include counseling, financial aid. job
training or placement, legal advice. etc. If the woman attempts to make it on her
own, more assistance may be provided in the form of a security deposit in order
to rent an apartment; Each woman is asked to sign a paper stating that. if
possible. she will repay monies which have been laid out on her behalf. To date.
over eighty percent of those women assisted by the project have repaid these
funds!
The shelter program now has a CETA coordinator. County funding has been
received and they are now sharing a three year ~50.000 LEAk grant.
Contact: Mrs. Florence Ballengee, 16 Bruce Road, Meehanicsville, Md. (301)
884-4184.
PAGENO="0213"
207
* PROJECT-WEST VIRGINIA'S CAMPAIGN AGAINST CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT
Pro ject Dcscription.-Ifl January, the television documentary on child abuse,
Raised in Anger, hosted by Ed Asner, was the kickoff point for the West Virginia
Juniors' campaign against child abuse. In cities with Public Broadcasting Sta-
tions, the Junior Clubs provided panel discussions for listener call-in shows after
airing the film. A proclamation for "Child Abuse Prevention Week," from Gov-
ernor Jay Rockefeller, and similar proclamations by many mayors throughout
the State were significant factors in raising the public awareness of this problem
and identifying resources within the state and community.
West Virginia Juniors were also active in the legislative. On March 26, 1979,
Governor Rockefeller signed the Juniors supported "Kiddie Porn" bill into law.
Felony charges are now placed against those who utilize children in porno-
graphic materials.
As a result of this project, multi-disciplinary Abuse Teams and Task Forces
are now active throughout the State. Many Clubwomen work as volunteers.
Examples of community programs are:
"Day out for Moms"-A project to provide temporary relief for mothers.
"Foster Grandparent-iflg"-TO fill a void for both age groups, children "adopt"
a grandparent and they meet at the Senior Center.
"Crisis nurseries for children"-OptiOfls for a 24-hour setting, used to avert
potential crisis situations, are being explored by two Abuse Teams.
Community meetings to discuss the needs of abused children.
Poster contests for school ehildren-"HapPifless is . . ." posters were placed in
stores of downtown merchants.
Development of Parents Anonymous Chapters for prevention . . . as well as
relief. National Headquarters: Parents Anonymous, 2810 Artesia Boulevard,
Redondo Beach, Calif.
Contact: Sheila Williams, 295 South Price St., Kingwood, W.Va.
PROJECT-HAVEN HILLs, INC.-CANOGA PARK WOMEN'S CLUB, CANOGA PARK
JUNIOR WOMEN'S CLUB, CALIFORNIA
Project Description.-In June of 1977 the Canoga Park Women's Clubs upon
completion of a complete community survey under the guidelines of the GFWC
Community Improvement Program initiated the project that was to become
Haven Hills, a shelter for battered women and their children. At that time there
was not a single shelter in the entire City of Los Angeles, although there are
now several. A survey conducted by Womanshelter in Long Beach `has shown
that to adequately meet the needs of battering victims in crisis situations, one
shelter per every 10,000 residents would be needed. In the San Fernando Valley,
population over 3.2 million and third ranked area in the nation in population
density of over 3,000 persons per square miles, Haven Hills will be. the only
resource for battered women and their children.
Haven Hills is a non-profit charitable corporation, whose 20 member Board of
Directors is representative of the broad base of community support. An office
with a business phone has been set up and at a separate site we have established
a crisis line whch became operational in April 1978. The volunteers serving on
the line have been given in-depth training during an 8 week telephone counsel-
ing training program developed by Haven Hills. Three training programs have
been offered with over 60 persons completing the required course. The hotline
offers resource and referral information and support in response to battering
calls, and it acts as a clearinghouse for all the shelters in the Los Angeles area.
We have an active speaker's bureau. Two auxiliaries have formed to aid in fund-
raising. We have been granted $125,000 from the City of Los Angeles from
Housing and Community Development Funds from HUD, which we are in the
final stages of the contractual procedure.
We hired an Executive Director in August 1978 and a Program Coordinator in
May 1979. To date we have raised over $25,000 in operaitng expenses and in kind
contributions totaling over $14,000. In addition $25,000 was raised for the down-
payment on the facility on which we closed escrow in April of this year. We are
currently renovating the building and anticipate the shelter becoming operational
in July 1979. The shelter will provide temporary housing for a battered woman
and her children for up to 30 days. Supportive help for the residents will include:
counseling, legal aid, welfare aid if needed; individual, group and family coun-
seling where all members of the family are involved in the recovery process;
PAGENO="0214"
208
adequate child care services; outreach program for after-care for former resi-
dents and participants in the services.
Haven Hills recognizes the family unit as the most important social system
within our culture. We hope that through intervention and treatment of the dys-
functional family as a unit, development of primary prevention techniques, and
education of the community, the patterns of violence within the family will be
broken.
Contact: Cheryl Cornell, 19321 Wells Drive, Tarzana, Calif.
PROJECT-BATTERED SPousEs-BIG RAPIDS INTERMEDIATE Wo~rAN's CLUB,
MICHIGAN
Project description: Six months ago the Big Rapids Intermediate Woman's
Club was asked by our county's Program for Alcohol and Substance Abuse to
join local agencies in discussions regarding the establishment of a "People's
Information Center". It was proposed that the Center serve victims of domestic
violence and offer a shelter; provide a referral service to other agencies; rape
prevention and counseling; and other services primarily aimed at women.
Club members interviewed a variety of agencies and determined there was
a definite need for a shelter for battered women in our county. In addition, the
local agencies appeared to have good communications and rapport with each
other and that the "People's Information Center" would not duplicate services
already adequately provided in the county.
The Club has supplied the funding for incorporation. Recently the incorpora-
tion papers were filed, a board of directors appointed, and the guidelines and
goals more clearly outlined.
Office space has been located in a community, building for a token amount of
rent until a shelter can be funded. Alternate possibilities for use as a short-
term shelter are being examined. Funding sources for the shelter are being
explored. We plan to apply for a grant to Michigan's Domestic Violence Preven-
tion and Treatment Board who will allocate $1,000,000 in grants this year in
Michigan for programs dealing with domestic violence.
As our project develops we will be happy to share information.
Contact: Mrs. Barbara Wallace, 720 Lilac, Big Rapids, Mich.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you.
I want to tell you, as I told the panel that you were originally a
part of that I think your testimony and support forthcoming from
the women's clubs for this legislation will in many ways be a major
break situation for the legislation.
I think it shows the broad concern throughout the community for
this problem, not just those people who have had the ability to orga-
nize into shelters, hot line counseling services or direct services,
but also other people in the community, formal organizations who'
see this as a problem and see a need to support it. I think that if the
women's clubs and the council of churches, junior league and others'
can show this support-in your case you took it on as a national proj-
ect and the ~Junior League did also-that it will make. a. marked differ-
ence in our ability to persuade the Con.~ress that they ought to deal
with this issue in terms of providing additional resourcc.s to augment
and in some cases to provide a surviva.l period, if necessary, until
the community understands that is a helpful resource, not some-
thing that is going to be divisive, not something t.hat will shame
them, but something that will help them become stronger.
That is our hope. Not t.o create a massive Federal program but to
take over what obviously thousands and thousa.nds of dedicated'
people have done beforehand.
So we appreciate very much your testimony.
Thank you.
Mr. MILLER. Next we will hear from a panel of Richard Flemrnff,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Neighborhoods, Voluntary Associa-
PAGENO="0215"
209
tions, and Community Protection, Department of Housing and Urban
Development; and William Allison, Deputy Director, Community
Services Administration.
Your prepared testimony will be entered into the record in its
entirety. Feel free to summarize because I am afraid you are about
to lose me when we come to a final vote on the Department of Educa-
tion bill.
So, welcome to the subcommittee.
STATEMENT OF RICHARD C. D. FLEMING, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SEC-
RETARY FOR NEIGHBORHOODS, VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS AND
COMMUNITY PROTECTION, DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
URBAN DEVELOPMENT; WILLIAM ALLISON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
COMMUNITY SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Mr. FLEMING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would briefly summarize my remarks which I have submitted for
the record.
I am pleased to testify before your committee as a member from
HUD of the Coordinating Committee which the President has created
on domestic violence, as well as Deputy Assistant Secretary for the
area of HUD which in addition to neighborhood concerns, concerns
itself with neighborhood protection.
In answer to some of the dialog which has taken place, I would like
to take occasion to respond to some of the comments you have raised and.
concerns that you have raised concerning the role of the coordinating:
council at the Federal level.
While I would be the last person in the world to suggest that is any
substitute for grass roots, locally based, self-development activity,.
which we certainly support, I think that it is fair to say that the role
of this coordinating council, which certainly does not represent a.
great deal of time and resources, does represent an important dime.n-.
sion from the standpoint of the administration's highlighting the~
priority for the issue, and certainly as the complexity of urban devel-
opment for sophisticated mayors and what not around this country
suggest, we still need an interagency coordinating council at the
White House for urban development.
The need to continue to coordinate varied resources at the Federal,
State, and local levels, I think, by the very nature of the issues that
we are dealing with, sugge.sts that every possible means that we can
bring to bear in terms of facilitating and advocating and creating
positive predisposition, as you have suggested yourself, has merit.
I assure you that we don't int.end to go out and create a new layer
of government through this council, but rather create that positive
predisposition.
In my statement I make the point that certainly the literature is
replete with compelling evidence that this problem is a serious one,
and we don't need to do a major study in the Federal Government
to know that the problems are significant.
From the standpoint of my own agency, I have highlighted in my
testimony some measures which we have begun to take and have taken
in the recent past at HUD dealing with specific measures to help.
PAGENO="0216"
210
increase the number of battered-women shelters and provide support
for their efforts.
As you and other persons testifying here suggested, we are dealing
with a human resources issue as well as a physical development issue
and housing issue, a shelter issue.
To highlight briefly the dimension of HTJD's involvement in tins
issue, and to highlight our priority for the issue, I would like to leave
with you a couple of the directions that we have takem
The women's policy and program staff in my office-and behind
me are two members of that staff, Ms. Joyce Skinner and Ms. Helen
Helfer-was very instrumental from within the Department in get-
ting battered-women shelters to be made specifically eligible as ac-
tivities under the $4 billion a year community development block grant
programs. This was manifested in the form of regulations which the
Department issued in March 1978.
The block grant program, which, as I indicated, is $4 billion a
year, is HUD's major funding avenue to local developmental activity.
To date, local governments have, in fact, utilized community develop-
ment block grant funds to create 19 shelters under this program.
I recently sent a memorandum to all of HIJD's neighborhood con-
sumer affairs representatives, highlighting this issue and updating
them on additional shelters, asking them for update on additional
shelters which may have received funding. We will be glad to give
the committee the benefit of that information when we receive it from
our field offices.
Secondly, we know that including battered-women's shelters as an
eligible activity in our regulations is not enough. During the past 18
months, the women's policy and program staff has had hundreds of
contacts with women's groups across the country, as well as with White
House, HEW, and the Commission on Civil Rights, which make it clear
that groups organized to carry out action programs to aid battered
women continue to have great difficulty in using Federal-including
HUD-programs for which they are eligible.
More recently, we conducted a phone survey to over 30 shelters, and
most of the respondents stressed the need for technical assistanc to
help them put together successful applications, how to comply with the
regulations, and where to secure funding.
To meet this growing problem, the Office of Neighborhoods, Volun-
tary Associations, and Consumer Protection plans to hold a national
consumer forum on domestic violence in October. The main purpose
of this forum will be to assure that every battered-women's shelter in
the country is made aware of HUD's funding programs, as well as
those of other Federal agencies, and is provided with timely informa-
tion, in plain English, on how to apply for HUD moneys at the local
level, as well as other information in the field.
Although we have concentrated our efforts to date on the coin-
munity development block grant program, we are also exploring
other HUD sources of funding as well, such as the section 8 housing
assistance program. The section 8 program provides assistance to
persons in rental housing by subsidizing the cost of that housing to
assure~ that no tenant pays more than 25 percent of his or her income
for rent.
PAGENO="0217"
211
The Office of Housing, for example, now has before it a proposal
from a shelter in Minneapolis to certify 13 bedrooms in a renovated
facility as section 8 units. The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency
has set aside about $196,614 to renovate the units for the shelter.
A similar proposal is being developed by a shelter in Kansas City
for second-stage section 8 housing. In other words, once a woman
has completed the shelter program, she could move into a section 8
unit until she became economically self-sufficient to support herself,
and in most instances, her children as well.
We are also considering exploring a program for women's shelters
to secure HUD-owned properties, particularly in urban areas where
the inventory is often sizable. In many instances, these properties can
be bought for a very minimal amount.
The recurring problem is to obtain adequate renovation funds.
We are pursuing title I property improvement loans and section
312 rehabilitation funds for these properties, as well as privately
owned properties, to assure that these programs are utilized to their
maximum extent for the victims of domestic violence.
The Office of Neighborhoods, Voluntary Associations, and Con-
sumer Protection administers the Department's program of housing
counseling assistance, and we are working to integrate the program
of battered-women's shelters with that prograim which this year is
operating at $900 million a year.
The key, as we see it, is to assure that women leaving shelters re-
ceive sound advice on the housing options available to them. The 302
agencies funded by HUD in fiscal year 1979 can, we believe, help
make that connection.
Another item not in my testimony I can see is directly relevant to
the issue as it relates to fostering and supporting self-help efforts.
We have as part of the President's urban policy presently before
the Congress for funding the Neighborhood Self-Help Development
Act. which will provide for direct funding for community economic
development and housing needs of neighborhood based, nonprofit self-
help groups, to the tune of $15 million per year in fiscal 1979 and 1980.
I'd also like to make the committee aware of the "women in mort-
gage credit" program which is administered by HUD's Office of
Policy Development and Research. This project is designed to pro-
vide technical assistance and information to women's organizations
and lenders in 16 cities throughout the country.
We are working to assure that the directors of battered-women's
shelters are involved in this training effort and that they receive the
informational pamphlets on housing options for women, which are
being prepared as part of the project by the National Council of
Negro ~Tomen
In conclusion, we are looking forward to working with the inter-
departmental committee and with the Congress in the year ahead
in the long-term goal of dealing with the complex problem of do-
mestic violence and of more adequately providing the necessary
public and private supports for its victims.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I will be delighted to
respond to any questions either at this point or after my colleague's
statement from CSA.
[Prepared statement of Richard Fleming follows:]
PAGENO="0218"
212
HUD's EFFORTS To DEAL WITH THE PROBLEMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE TESTIMONY
SUBMITTED BY RICHARD C. D. FLEMING, GENERAL DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY,
OFFICE OF NEIGHBORHOODS, VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS AND CoNsu~rnn PRO-
TECTION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HoUsING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AT THE
HEARINGS ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OF THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SELECT EDUCA-
TION, SUBCOMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR
On behalf of Secretary Harris and Assistant Secretary for Neighborhoods,
Voluntary Associations and Consumer Protection, Geno Baroni, I welcome this
opportunity to testify before the committee today.
As the HUD representative to the Presidentially-created Inter-Departmental
Committee on Domestic Violence, I am committed to examining all possibilities
within HUD for meeting the shelter needs of domestic violence victims. A recent
survey of over 300 Battered Women's Shelters conducted by the Colorado Asso-
ciation of Aid to Battered Women, an HEW grantee, stated simply that, "shel-
ters are generally over-crowded. The scarcity of housing has resulted in the
ruse of apartments, motels, hotels, as well as converted private residences. Many
of these physical facilities present problems in terms of adequate communal
~space, appropriate facilities for children and excessive costs. In this problem
:area, the need for a nationwide system of adequately funded facilities for
;shelter care is still a priority.
HUD has taken the following specific measures to help increase the number of
battered women's shelters and provide support for their efforts:
(1) The Women's Policy and Program Staff in my Office working with the
Office of CPD made women's shelters an eligible activity under HUD's Community
Development Block Grant Regulations which were issued in i~Iarch 1978. The
`CDPG Program, at nearly $4 Billion per year, is HUD's major funding avenue
to local activities. To date, local governments have utilized CDPG funds to create
at least nineteen shelters under this program. I recently sent a memorandum to
all of HUD's Neighborhood and Consumer Affairs R~presentatives in our 40 Area
Offices and 10 Regional Offices requesting an update on additional shelters which
may have received funding. We will be glad to forward a copy of our report to
you upon its completion.
(2) We know that including battered women's shelters as an eligible activity
in our regulations is not enough. During the past 18 months, the Women's Policy
and Program Staff has had hundreds of contacts with women's groups across the
country as well as with th~ White House, HEW and the Commission on Civil
Rights which make it clear that groups organized to carry out action programs
to aid battered women continue to have great difficulty in using Federal (includ-
ing HUD) programs for which they are eligible. More recently, we conducted a
phone survey to over thirty shelters, and most of the respondents stressed the
need for technical assistance to help them put together successful applications,
how to comply with the regulations and where to secure ftnding.
The meet this growing problem, the Office of Neighborhoods, Voluntary Asso-
ciations and Consumer Protection plans to hold a national Consumer Forum on
Domestic Violence in October. The main purpose of this Forum will be to assure
that every battered women's shelter in the country is made aware of HUD's
funding programs, and is provided with timely information-in plain English-
on bow to apply for HUD monies at the local level.
(3) Although we have concentrated our efforts to date on the Community
Development Block Grant program, we are also exploring other HUD sources of
funding as well, such as the section 8 Housing Assistance Program. The "Section
8" Program provides assistance to persons in rental housing by subsidizing the
cost of that housing to assure that no tenant pays more than 25 percent of his or
or her income for rent. The Office of Housing, for example, now has before it a
proposal from a shelter in Minneapolis to certify 13 bedrooms in a renovated
facility as "Section 5" units. The Minnesota Housing Finance Agency has set
aside about $1OG,614 to renovate the units for the shelter. A similar proposal is
being developed by a shelter in Kansas City for "second stage" section S housing.
In other words, once a woman has completed the shelter program, she could move
into a section 8 unit until she became economically self-sufficient to support
herself-and in most instances, her children, as well.
\\Te are considering exploring the use of HUD-owned properties for shelter and
`encouraging the use of title I loans or section 312 funds to rehabilitate those in
need of renovation.
The Office of Neighborhoods, Voluntary Associations and Consumer Protection
administers the Department's program of housing counseling assistance and we
PAGENO="0219"
213
are working to integrate the programs of battered women's shelters with that
program. The key, as we see it, is to assure that women leaving shelters receive
sound advice on the housing options availaible to them. The 302 agencies funded
by HTJD in fiscal year 1979 can, we believe, help make that connection.
I'd also like to make the committee aware of the "Women in Mortgage Credit"
Project which is administered by HUD's Office of Policy Development and Re-
search. This effort is designed to provide technical assistance and information
to women's organizations and lenders in 16 cities throughout the country. We
are working to assure that the directors of `battered women's shelters are in-
volved in this training effort and that they receive the informational pamphlets
on housing options for women which are `being prepared as part of the project
by the National Council of Negro Women.
In conclusion, we are looking forward to working with the Inter-Depart-
mental Committee and with the `Congress in the year ahead in the long-term
goal of dealing with the complex problem of domestic violence and of more
adequately providing the necessary public and private supports for its victims.
STATEMENT OP WILLIAM W. ALLISON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
COMMUNITY SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Mr. MILLER. Go ahead.
Mr. ALLISON. I am replacing Robert Smith who was scheduled
to speak this afternoon but, unfortunately, is ill.
CSA shares the concern of this committee for the issue of domestic
violence in this country.
I would like to summarize briefly the remarks you have available
to you. We can speak to this on three levels: First are our Community
Action agencies which are the principal constituent organizations
that we support.
We have a number of projectsthat are involved in serving battered
women. Unfortunately, we are unable to provide you with a complete
survey today. If you will permit us, we can provide that for the record.
But a survey was done in 1978 in five States, to determine the Com-
munity Action activities targeted toward battered women.
A partial response indicated that 33 Community Action agencies
had programs and/or shelters serving battered women.
In addition, Community Action agencies handled domestic violence-
related problems on an ad hoc crisis basis. As an example, in the last
6 months our headquarters has received over 20 inquiries and 18
unsolicited proposals totaling over $3 million from 24 States for bat-
tered-women programs. We have recommended that most of these
groups explore program development with Community Action agen-
cies or pursue funding with the LEAA or HEW.
The second level represents our national demonstration program.
Here we have funded three such programs. We have a program in
Milwaukee; a family crisis intervention and support program; and
we also are providing support, training, and technical assistance for
agencies in Pennsylvania and Massachusetts.
The Family Crisis Intervention Center in Milwaukee has been
established to strengthen and assist low-income families through crisis
intervention, including shelter, counseling, and support, for 700
families.
In addition to service delivery, this project will carry out advocacy
efforts through the development and promotion of policy changes to
address the root causes of family stress and instability. .
The Pennsylvania and Massachusetts proj ects are developing train-
ing modules for operators of shelters.
PAGENO="0220"
214
You have expressed a concern for the need for technical assistance
and training. These two programs support services to families in crisis
by providing technical assistance and training workshops, in shelter
development, management and maintenance, needs assessment, grants-
manship, organizational development and counseling, as well as legal
advocacy, media outreach, hotline management, and evaluation
capacity.
In Harrisburg, Pa., 19 centers and shelters are served. Shelter man-
agement involves formerly battered women and, as such, establishes a
novel self-sufficiency option.
A third area of CSA involvement in this field is presented by inter-
agency initiatives. CSA and LEAA will soon finalize a cooperative
agreement joining the efforts of both agencies in support of selected
family violence projects. CSA plans to transfer $125,000 of fiscal year
1979 tÔLEAA for the purpose of supporting specific efforts dedicated
to the clients of local Community Action agencies.
Top-ranking candidates for LEAA family violence project grants
and local Community Action agencies are currently wor1~ng together
to develop plans for project components which will be specifically
designed to assist low-income families suffering from family violence
problems. Community Action agencies will be involved in such areas
as outreach services to identify low-income families in need of assist-
ance, provision of victim advocate services, and communitywide train-
ing efforts.
Plans reviewed thus far indicate this cooperative effort should result
in expanded community support of .family violence programs and a
more effective use of available resources from all sectors of the coin-
munity. Final plans for the CAA components of these projects are
being reviewed by both CSA and LEAA.
In response to the need for greater public awareness of domestic
violence, CSA and the National Institute of Mental Health cospon-
sored a nationwide lecture tour on domestic violence, keynoting the
founder of the Chiswick Women's Aid Center, Ms. Erin Pizzey. The
Chiswick Center became the testing ground for many of the compre-
hensive services which are now being suggested here in the United
States. Five low-income communities were added to the tour to assure
that needs of low-income, ethnic minority women were addressed in
the tour program.
In the President's budget for fiscal year 1980 for the Community
Services Administration, $9 million was requested for demonstration
programs. As presented to Congress, CSA would have utilized approx-
imately $3 million of the requested $9 million budget for demonstra-
tions in the area of family-child services, for activities such as the
Milwaukee Crisis Center. Unfortunately, the House appropriations
billdoes not include such funding.
I have some further information on specific local programing of
CSA grantees for the record, and I welcome your questions.
[Prepared statement and enclosure of William Allison follows:]
TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM W. ALLISON, DEPUTY DIRECTOR. Co~rMuNITY S~nvIcEs
ADMINISTRATION, BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SELECT EDUCATION, COMMITTEE
ON EDUCATION AND LABOR, LT.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Mr. Chairman, members of the subcommittee, it is a pleasure to be with
YOU today. I am Bill Allison, Deputy Director of the Community Services
Administration.
PAGENO="0221"
215
CSA shares the concern of this committee for the issue of domestic violence in
this country today.
President Carter, likewise, has expressed his concern for what he called a
"growing crisis" of severe violence occurring in American homes. It was for this
reason that on April 27, 1979, he directed the Secretary of the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare to chair an Interdepartmental Committee on
Domestic Violence to review current Federal programing and formulate a work
plan.
CSA is wholeheartedly cooperating by sharing its past and current experience
with local programs that serve low income victims of domestic violence and by
contributing to this important joint effort to coordinate future actions. However,
I u-ill defer to Ms. Cardenas on the committee's progress to date.
CSA's efforts in this area consist of three levels of involvement: (1) Commu-
nity action agencies using "local initiative" money; (2) national demonstration
programs; and (3) interagency initiatives.
CSA currently has local-level programs designed to address the varying needs
of those affected by domestic violence. Using "local initiative" money, many com-
munity action agencies administer programs in response to locally defined needs.
Unfortunately, we were not able to collect complete information oii Community
Action Agency projects relating to domestic violence for this hearing. However,
in 1978 a survey was conducted to determine CAA activities targeted toward
women in five States. A partial response indicated that 33 CAAs had programs
and/or shelters serving battered women. In addition, many CAA's handle domes-
tic violence-related problems on an ad hoc, crisis basis. In the last 6 months, CSA.
Headquarters has received over 20 inquiries and 18 unsolicited proposals (total-
ing over $3 million) from 24 States for battered women programs. We have
recommended that most of these groups explore program development with the
local CAA or pursue funding with LEAA or HEW.
New and creative approaches to the problems of domestic violence are being
tested through national demonstration programs. CSA has funded three such
programs: A Family Crisis Intervention and Support Program in Milwaukee,
Wisconsin and Training and Technical Assistance Programs for agencies provid-
ing services to victims of domestic violence in Pennsylvania and Massachusetts.
The Family Crisis Intervention Center is being established to strengthen and
assist low-income families through crisis intervention including shelter, counsel-
ing and support services for 700 families. In addition to service delivery, this
project will carry out advocacy efforts through the development and promotion
of policy changes to address the root causes of family stress and instability.
The Pennylvania and Massachusetts projects are developing training modules
for operators of shelters. These two programs support services to families in
crisis by providing technical assistance and training workshops in shelter devel-
opment, management and maintenance; needs assessment; grantsmanship; or~
ganizational development; nnd counseling-as well as legal advocacy, media out-
reach, hotline management, and evaluation capacity.
In Harrisburg, Pa., 19 centers and shelters are served. Shelter management
involves formerly battered women and, as such, establishes a novel self-sufficiency
option.
A third area of GSA involvement in this field is presented by interagency
initiatives. CSA and LEAA will soon finalize a cooperative agreement joining the
efforts to both agencies in support of selected family violence projects. CSA
plans to transfer $125,000 (fiscal year 1979 funds) to LEAA for the purpose of
supporting specific efforts dedicated to the clients of local community action
agencies. Top ranking candidates for IJEAA family violence project grants and
local community action agencies are currently working together to develop plans
for project components which will be specifically designed to assist low-income
families suffering from family violence problems. Community action agencies
will be involved in such areas as outreach services to identify low-income families
in need of assistance, provision of victim advocate services, and communitywide
training efforts. Plans reviewed thus far indicate this cooperative effort should
result in expanded community support of family violence programs and a more
effective use of available resources from all sectors of the community. Final plans
for the CAA components of these projects are being reviewed by both CSA and
LEAA.
In response to the need for greater public awareness of domestic violence, GSA
and the National Institute of Mental Health co-sponsored a nationwide lecture
tour on Domestic Violence keynoting the founder of the Chiswick Women's Aid
Center, Ms. Erin Pizzey. (The Chiswick Center became the testing ground for
49-914-79-----15
PAGENO="0222"
216
:many of the comprehensive services which are now being suggested here in the
* United States.) Five low-income communities were added to the tour to assure
* that needs of low-income, ethnic minority women were addressed in the tour
program.
In the President's budget for fiscal year 1980 for the Community Services Ad-
ministration, $9 million was requested for Demonstration programs. As presented
to Congress, CSA would have utilized approximately $3 million of the requested
$9 million budget for demonstrations in the area of "Family-Child Services," for
activities such as the Milwaukee Crisis Center. Unfortunately, the House appro-
priations bill does not include such funding.
I have some further information on specific local programing of CSA grantees
for the record, and I welcome your questions.
FACT SHEET
The following is a brief survey of existing CSA programs in support of centers
:and shelters for victims of domestic abuse.
PROGRAM AREA
Domestic Violence, Family Crisis Centers: CSA is funding several model
~Family Crisis Intervention Centers with adjunct Women's Shelters.
GRANTEE
Community Relations-Social Development Commission.
NAME OF PROGRAM
Family Center: A Family Crisis Intervention and Support Program.
CONTRACT PERSON
Bob Olson, Social Development Commission, Milwaukee, Wis., Phone (414)
272-5600.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The Family Crisis Intervention Center will strengthen and assist low-income
families and family members through crisis intervention which can include crisis
shelters and concomitant provisions of counseling and support services to 700
families during 1 year.
This Center will address the problems of domestic violence by addressing the
~total family unit at the time of crisis with intervention services.
In addition to service delivery, this project will carry out advocacy efforts
through the development and promotion of policy changes which alleviate the
root causes of family stress and instability.
Special attention will be paid to the constructive development of welfare re-
form. Research and evaluation will also be conducted to further define the multi-
ple problems of low-income families and test the service delivery approach.
FISCAL YEAR 1978 FUNDING
$620,455.
PROGRAM AREA
Domestic Violence, Training and Technical Assistance.
GRANTEE
Bureau of Human Resources, Department of Community Affairs, Harrisburg,
Pa.
CONTACT PERSON
Lisa Yaffe, Department of Community Affairs, State Economic Opportunity
Office, Harrisburg, Pa., Phone (717) 787-1964.
NAME OF PROGRAM
Training and Technical Assistance Plan for Agencies Providing Services to
Victims of Domestic Abuse.
PAGENO="0223"
217
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This project will sponsor eight training workshops for agencies providing as-
sistance to victims of domestic violence. Training will be in the areas of program
management and development. The effectiveness of the training will be tested by
surveying existing agencies before and after training. Particular attention will
be paid to the effectiveness of non-traditional methods of management of shelters
for domestic violence victims. This project will be conducted in participation with
the Pennsylvania Coalition against Domestic Violence.
Participating Domestic Abuse Centers include:
1. Beaver County Women's Center.
2. The Greenhouse.
3. Women's Center and Shelter of Greater Pittsburgh.
4. A Women's Place.
5. Hospitality House.
6. Susquehanna Valley Women in Transition.
7. Women in Crisis.
8. Lancaster Shelter.
-9. Bloomsburgh Women's Center.
10. Women's Center Shelter.
11. Banks County Women in Crisis.
12. Women's Center-Wilhiamsport.
13. Women's Aid Center.
14. Women's Center of Montgomery County.
15. Marital Abuse Project.
16. Women Against Abuse.
17. Women's Resource Center.
18. Women in Transition.
19. A Women's Place.
FISCAL YEAR 1979 FUNDING
$100,000.
PROGRAM AREA
Domestic Abuse, Training and Technical Assistance.
GRANTEE
`The Massachusetts Coalition of Battered Women Service Groups, Boston, Mass.
CONTACT PERSON
Judith Morre, The Mass Coalition for Women's Service Programs, Boston,
Mass., Phone (617) 864-7725.
NAME OF PROGRAM
Education and Training Project.
PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
This project will encompass the planning, implementation and evaluation of a
Lomprehensive training program to upgrade the quality of services provided to
battered women and their children to impact the Massachusetts statewide area.
Specific training components will include basic counseling techniques, legal
advocacy and media outreach skills. Recipients of this training will be the staff
~ind residents of battered women service groups. Training materials will be
`provided and available for distribution throughout the state and county.
A central office and communications network, with the efforts of outreach
workers, will support this training activity.
FISCAL YEAR 1979 FUNDING
$100,000.
The following is a survey of Community Services Administration sponsored
Community Action Agencies and Women's Centers and Shelters which offer aid
to victims of Domestic Abuse. These facilities are characterized by providing
one or more of the following services to battered wives.
1. Lodgings and support systems for battered women staffed by empathetic
women which may include a group of women who have experienced battering.
Maiiy of `these shelters are experimenting with alternative forms of management.
PAGENO="0224"
218
2. A broad spectrum of support services which may include professional legaL
and psychological counseling, employment training and housing referrals.
3. Legal advocacy and outreach efforts.
PROGRAM AREA
Domestic Violence, Women's Centers and Shelters.
GRANTEE
Listed below.
PROGRAM NAME
Centers for Battered Women.
CAAs and the Women's Centers and Shelters:
1. Cambridge Economic Opportunity Committee, Inc., Cambridge, Mass.
2. Urban Planning Aid, Boston, Mass.
3. Community Action Program of Lancaster County, Lancaster, Pa.
4. City of Peoria Citizens Committee for Econ. Opport., Peoria, Ill.
5. CAC of Madison County, Anderson, md.
6. Saginaw County CAC, Inc., Saginaw, Mich.
7. Anoka County CAA, Inc., Anoka, Minn.
8. Hawkeye Area Community Action Program, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
9. City of Wichita Community Action, Wichita, Kans.
10. CAP, Inc., Bismarck, N. Dak.
11. San Juan Basin Regional Planning Commission, Durango, Cob.
12. Wake County Opportunities, Inc., Raleigh, N.C.
13. Pierce County Community Action Agency, Takoma, Wash.
14. Butte County Economic Opportunity, Oronville, Calif.
15. Cuyaga Community Action Agency, Ambren, N.Y.
16. Napa County Council for Economic Opportunity, Napa, Calif.
17. CAO Erie Co. Schenectady, N.Y.
18. New Rochelle Community Action Agency, New Rochelle, N.Y.
19. Shawnee County Community Assistance, Topeka, Kans.
20. Economic Opportunity Commission of Imperial County, El Cent~o, Calif.
21. St. Cloud Area Women's Center, St. Cloud, Minn.
22. Johnson County Office of Human Resources, Bismarck, N. Dak.
23. Family Planning Arm of Maine, Augusta, Maine.
24. Hampshire County Community Action Council, Hampshire, Vt.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you. Mr. Kramer?
Mr. KRAMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
On page 2 of your testimony, you indicate that women shelters
are an eligible activity at present under the block grant regulations.
Can you tell me how much money has been allocated for this purpose
at this point?
Mr. FLEMING. No, sir, I can't tell you the specific amount. I will
be delighted to supply it for the record. Our experience to date is
that 19 such shelters have been funded with CETA money. I suspect
as a result of the communication we have had with our field staff that
we will learn of others. I will be glad to include you in our sharing of
the result, as well as the nunTher.
Mr. KRAMER. In addition to what you prepare for the record, will
you also submit a copy to our office all the sums that are presently
being expended for this fiscal year toward this pursuit?
Mr. FLEMING. I will be delighted to.
[The information follows:]
PAGENO="0225"
219
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, OFFICE
OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR NEIGHBORHOOD, VOLUNTARY
ASSOCIATIONS AND CONSUMER PROTECTION,
Washington, D.C., August 9, 1979.
Mr. PAUL SIMON,
~Chair, Committee on Education and Labor Subcommittee on Select Education,
Cannon House Office Building,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. SIMON: I want to thank you again for the opportunity of testifying
before your Committee on 1-IUD's efforts to deal with the problems' of domestic
Violence on July 11, 1079.
In response to the Committee's request for information on 1-IUD funded
"shelters, I am enclosing a copy of our latest survey which indicates that 27
shelters received Community Development Block Grant moneys this past year,
totaiing $1,193,491. As former Secretary Harris recently stated at the National
Women's Political Caucus Convention, we plan to triple that amount in the
coming year.
Please don't hesitate to contact me or Ms. Heifer in our Women's Policy and
`Programs Office if you have any questions regarding the enclosed survey.
Sincerely yours,
RICHARD C. D. FLEMING,
General Deputy Assistant Secretary.
Enclosure.
Listing of battered women's shelters receiving CDBG funding
Shelter Amount Received
Arkansas: Project for Victims of Family Violence, P.O. Box 1168,
Fayetteville, Ark.-Contact: Ms. Butler $77, 250
"California:
Women's Resource Center, 4070 Mission Ave., San Luis Rey, Calif.,
Collen Richardson, executive director 100, 000
Tn-Valley Haven for Women, P.O. Box 188, Livermore, Calif.~__ 26, 500
R,osasharon, Inc., P.O. Box 4583, North 1-lollywood, Calif., Con-
tact: Beverly Monosmith 188, 250
`Connecticut:
New Haven Project for Battered Women, Inc., P.O. Box 1329, New
Haven, Conn. 30, 000
Women's Center of Southeastern Connecticut, 110 Broad St., New
London, Conn. 23, 976
Prudence Crandall Center, 37 Bassett St., New Britain, Conn. 13, 000
Women's Emergency lncorp., 222 West Main St., Waterbury,
Conn.-Contact: Sister Marie 8
Florida: Women In Distress, P.O. Box 8505, Fort Lauderdale, F1a__~ 50, 000
`Kansas:
Wichita Women's Crisis Center, P.O. Box 1740. Wichita, Kans__ 100, 000
Battered Women's Task Force, % YWCA, 225 West 12th, Topeka,
Icans 56, 000
Maine:
Abused Women's Advocacy Program, Patricia Jorgenron, director,
P.O. Box 713, Auburn, Maine 5, 000
Family Crisis Center, P.O. Box 4255, Station A, Portland, Maine__ 3, 000
`Massachusetts: Respond, Inc. 1 Summer St., Somerville, Mass-Con-
tact: Martha Black 28, 000
Michigan:
NOW Domestic Violence Project, 1917 Wastenaw Ave., Ann Arbor,
Mich.-Contact: Kathleen Fojtik 6, 400
Domestic Violence Shelter Project Family and Children's Services
of Calhoun County, 182 West Van Buren St., Battle Creek,
Mich.-Contact: Barbara McDaniel
42, 615
PAGENO="0226"
220
Listing of battered women's shelters receiving UDBG funding-Continued
Shelter
Amount
Michigan :-Continued Received
Underground Railroad, P.O. Box 565, Saginaw, Mich.-Contact:
Susan Davis $50, 000
Center for Women in Transition, 834 Grant St., Grand Haven,
Mich.-Contact: Pam McKulka 5,000
The Shelter Project for Battered Women, Inc., Northern Michigan
University Women's Center, Marquette, Mich.-Contact: Holly
Greer 2, 500
YWCA Domestic Assault Program of Kalamazoo YWCA, 211
South Rose, Kalamazoo, Mich.-Contact: Carolyn Krill 31, 000
Minnesota: Harriet Tubman Women's Shelter, 3001 Oakland Ave.,
Minneapolis, Minn 100, 000
New Mexico: Women's Community Association Shelter for Victims
of Domestic Violence, 8915 Central NE., Albuquerque, New Mex.:
Last fiscal year 25, 000
This fiscal year 23,000
North Carolina: High Point Women's Shelter, Inc., P.O. Box 826, High
Point, N.C 12, 000
Rhode Island: Elizabeth Buffum Cliace House, P.O. Box 18, Warwick,
R.T.-Contact: Linda Sullivan. Sponsored by the Warwick Jr.
Women's Club:
Last fiscal year 7,400
South Carolina: Women In Crisis, P.O. Box 10306, Greenville, S.C___ 60, 000
Wisconsin:
Sojourner Truth House, P.O. Box 08110, Milwaukee, Wis.-Con-
tact: Claudette McShane:
Last fiscal year 126. 000
This fiscal year 150, 000
Women's Horizons, Inc., P.O. Box 103, Kenosha, Wis.-Contact:
Mary Stark:
Lease, 1977 13, 500
Purchase, 1977 30, 000
Renovation, 1979 15, 000
Total this fiscal year 1,193,491
1 This listing was compiled from several sources including a survey of the
Colorado Association for Aid to Battered Women, a survey of the Center for-
Women's Policy Studies, and a HUD NVACP survey completed in July.
2 For Battered Women hotline.
3No't available.
Mr. MILLER. Those are community project grants; is that right?
Mr. FLEMING. Yes, sir.
Mr. MILLER. Where local communities get a block of money and they
make the determination of how to spend it?
Mr. FLEMING. That is right.
Mr. KRAMER. Mr. Allison, can you do the same for us? To the extent
that your testimony is not complete, I would like to get an itemized
breakdown, if I could, of all sums that are being spent on domestic
Violence programs.
Mr. ALLISON. For this particular effort, yes; we will be glad to sub-
mit it.
[The information follows:]
COMMUNITY SERvIcEs ADMINISTRATION SUPPORT o~ DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROJECTS.
INTRODUCTION
When a battered woman decides She has had enough; when death becomes.
not just a threat but an impending reality; when the lives of her children are
jeopardized; when the critical moment becomes the breaking point, she will
leave.
PAGENO="0227"
221
She will leave, often with only the clothes on her back, a few of her children's~
things and a day's pocket money in her purse.
Women who leave their homes with no access to financial resources become
eligible for emergency welfare assistance for both themselves and their children.
It is vital to understand that many of these women were already impoverished
by their economic and physical dependence on violent men. Many women are
willing to pay the price of regular beatings to keep their children and them-
selves fed, clothed and housed.
The Community Services Administration has long been an advocate for indi-
viduals who struggle to live a life of dignity and freedom from poverty and
abuse. Therefore, we have accepted the challenge to aid these low-income or
no-income women and children in their struggle for independence.
The Community Services Administration provides vital crisis intervention
services through Local Initiative monies which are supporting Shelters for vic-
tims of domestic abuse across the country. These are organized with assistance
from GSA's local Community Action Agency network.
A comprehensive survey is being developed by GSA to better determine the
extent of our support services to these victims of assault and domestic abuse.
For this Subcommittee report a phone survey was conducted of several OAA's
across the country to get a sample of the types of CAA sponsored shelter pro-
grams and their client populations.
PHONE SURVEY OF CAA SUPPORTED SHELTERS
UAA contaeted.-Gambridge Economic Opportunity Committee, Inc., Cam- -
bridge, Mass.
Shelter supported.-The Transition House.
Program description.-The Transition House is a Shelter for battered women
with a housing capacity for ten women and their children. Due to limited space
the Shelter can only accept women with the greatest need. The Shelter has been
operating at full capacity since their opening in 1976. Women with children can
stay up to a period of six weeks and women without children can stay for one
month. Half of the twelve person staff are men. The majority of women who
enter the Shelter will be receiving some form of emergency public assistance for
themselves and their children.
CAA contacted.-Community Action Program of Lancaster County, Lancaster,
Pa.
Shelter supported.-The shelter for Abused Women-(717) 299-1249.
Program description-The Shelter for Abused Women is equipped to house 25--
women and their children. The Center has been operating at full capacity since
its opening. Eight staff operate this Shelter. At least 75 percent of the women at
the Shelter receive public assistance. This Shelter is receiving $33,000 in CSA~
Local Initiative fundtag.
CAA contacted.-Saginaw County CAO, Inc., Saginaw, Mich.
Shelter funded.-The Underground Railroad, Director: Sue Davis-(517)
755-0411.
Program description.-The Underground Railroad which opened its doors on
December 27, 1977, has a full-time staff of twelve supplemented by volunteers.
They are equipped to house 25 people with an average occupancy of 8 mothers.
The residents are allowed to stay 1 month and longer if the Shelter deems it
necessary.
CAA contacted-CAP Services, Inc., Stevens Point, Wis.
Shelter supported-Family Crisis Center, Stevens Point, Wis.
Program description.-The Family Crisis Center's three basic components
are: (1) to provide emergency shelter in times of crisis to Family members,
(2) to provide crisis intervention counseling on a 24-hour basis. This hot-line is
operated in conjunction with the local Mental Health Department, and (3) to
provide para-legal assistance in pre-trial mediation and post sentencing deferred
incarceration assistance.
UAA. contacted-Pierce County Community Action Agency, Tacoma, Wash.-
(206) 383-2593.
Shelter funded.-The YMCA Shelter for Battered Women, Tacoma, Wash.
Program description.-The YMCA Shelter for Battered Women is supported
in part by the Pierce County Community Action Agency. This Shelter serves:
women in the Seattle Tacoma area and has extended their services to women
as far East as Montana. The Shelter is equipped to house 55 women and their
PAGENO="0228"
222
children up to three months. In the month of June, 36 women and 95 children
were sheltered. An average of 35 needy women come to the shelter for refuge
and aid each month. The average income of women at the shelter is $200.00 a
month. Ninety-nine percent of these women are receiving public assistance.
Although some of the women are employed, their crisis situation adversely af-
fects their ability to hold a job for an extended period of time.
GALA contacted.-Cayuga County Action Program, Cayuga County, New York-
(315) 253-1704.
~S7ielter funded.-The Safe Homes Project conducted by the Guyuga County
Action Program utilities 15 homes to provide refuge for battered women and
their children on a short term basis (2-3 days). In conjunction with this pro-
gram. weekly support group conselling sessions are held along with social
service guidance, legal advocacy and housing referrals assistance. In program
year 1979 the Save Homes Program provided refuge for one hundred and eleven
women.
In 1979 the Community Services Administration funded the Family Crisis
Intervention and Support Program (a $620,455 project) in Milwaukee, Wiscon-
sin. The goals of this program are to strengthen and assist low income families
by providing crisis intervention services i.e. crisis shelters and counselling and
support services to 700 familities in the one year funding period. The program
is designed to include all family members in the resolution of the crisis situation.
In addition to service delivery, this project is carrying out advocacy efforts
through the development of new program resources and the development and
promotion of policy changes which would alleviate the root causes of family
stress and instability.
The following pares include some initial data from the Family CrisIs Inter-
vention and Support program's initial research into the problems of domestic
violence in the Milwaukee area.
PROFILE OF THE TARGET POPULATION OF THE FAMILY CRISIS CENTER
The overriding premises of the Family Crisis Center that complex. and often
interrelated, problems act to produce stress and crisis situations in many famil-
lies. The particular client population of the Family Crisis Center is Milwaukee's
low-income households. This report will attempt to present data and information
of family problems as they relate to tbis particular population. It should be noted
that obtaining exact data on the incidences of various problems is not possible:
estimates and other indicators must be used. This report cannot provide concrete
data on every relevant problem, but can offer insight into the range and scope of
prol)lerns affecting low-income families in Milwaukee.
The report will include the following: General population profile; profile of
the low-income population; problems of low-income families (unemployment.
inadequate education/education-related problems, housing problems, mental
health problems (including alcoholism and drug abuse), physical health prob-
lems. domestic violence (including both spouse and child abuse), juvenile delin-
quency).
For each problem, the following will be included: General problem statement;
specific problems and their prevalence; available services; relevance of problem
to the Family Crisis Center.
FAMILY CRISIS AND INTERVENTION CENTER
HIGHLIGHTS FROM MILwAUKEE, WISCONSIN TARGET POPULATION SURVEY
Almost 15 percent of Milwaukee households and nearly 18 percent of Milwaukee
city households live in poverty
While most of the people (66 percent) living in poverty are white; Poverty
disproportionately affects minority peole. One-third of the Blacks and Native
Americans and one-fifth of Latins living in Milwaukee County are poor. In con-
trast, only one-tenth of the White population is poor.
The high poverty rate among minorities is largciy e~plained by the severely high
unemplopment rates among these groups
The current unemployment rate for minorities is estimated to be 14.2 percent
in the county, 17.5 percent in the city, and nearly 20 percent in the CR-SDC
Inner City target area. Local surveys indicate that as many as 35 percent of
Latin workers and 32 percent of Native American workers are out of work.
PAGENO="0229"
223
Particular groups are especially affected by wnemployment
I addition to the employment problems of minorities, other groups experience
significant difficulties in finding work: women, youth, veterans, elderly, and those
with histories of substance abuse, and criminal records.
Poor education keeps many minority and/or low-income people from obtaining
adequate employment
The educational disparities between White and Black students are reflected
in the city-wide annual testing scores. In addition, minority students suffer dis-
proportionate rates of suspension, truancy, and dropping-out.
Low-income families eceperienee significant housing-related problems
Economic and racial segregation act to limit low-income families' housing
options. In addition, the cost of housing often means that low-income families
are spending a disproportionate share of their income for housing that is often
dilapidated and overcrowded. Ever-increasing energy costs have presented a
continuing hardship for low-income families.
A variety of mental health problems contribute to family stress.
In Milwaukee County, there are an estimated, 102,000 people with mental/
emotional problems, 89,000 alcoholics, and 20,000-31,000 drug abusers. While
these problems exist across socio-economic and racial lines, the access of low-
inome and minority individuals to assistance with these problems is limited.
Low-income families suffer a disproportionate rate of infant mortality and
morbidity, and suffer higher ineidenees of disease in nearly every category
than do higher-income families
In addition, low-income families do not have the access to health care that
is available for higher-income families. The Inner City area has recently been
designated by HEW as a Critical Health Manpower Shortage Area.
Domestic violence, while occurring *a,t every income level, may have a greater
impact on low-income families because their access to asisstance is limited
bg lack of income and other factors
Child and spouse abuse are widespread problems. In 1977, there were 739
reported cases of child abuse and 906 reported cases of spouse abuse. The
consensus of experts in the field is that reported cases represent only a small
percentage of the actual incidence of these problems.
Juvenile delinquency can present critical problems for families
In 1975, juvenile arrests accounted for 43.6 percent of all city arrests. Low-
income and minority youth are more likely to be involved in formal court pro-
ceedings as a result of their delinquency than are white and middle-income
youth.
INITIAL FINDINGS OF DoMEsTIc VIOLENCE LITERATURE SURvEY OF
FACTORS THAT IMPACT Low INCoME FAMILIES
Domestic violence includes child and spouse abuse. Family stress compounded
by a lack of coping skills, often causes low income individualS to resort to violent
actions toward one or more members of the family.
Characteristic statistical data of low income family problems is scarce. There
is a reluctance to report child and/or spouse abuse by relatives and friends, or
for abusers to seek help themselves if they are abusive or physically violent.
Spouse abuse is one of the most critical crisis situations a family can experi-
ence. Seriously are the abused spouse, the abuser, and their children affected by
the violence they suffer, witness or sense in the kome. Spouse abuse data, like
data on child abuse, is also extremely difficulty to find. Estimates and research
study results, however, do provide some indications of the scope of the problem.
A survey conducted by the National Commission on the Causes and Prevention
of Crime and Violence found that between one-fourth and one-fifth of the adults
questioned felt it was acceptable for spouses `to hit each other under certain
circumstances.' In a single year, approximately three and a half million whinen
and 250,000 men are beaten by their spouses.'
A police survey conducted in Chicago (1965-66) indicated that 46.1 percent
of all major crimes (excluding murder) perpetrated against women, took place
I Stark. R. and McEvoy, J., "Middle Class Violence," Psyelwiogy ToSay, Vol. 4, 1970,
pp. 52-65.
PAGENO="0230"
224
~at home. In Detroit 4,900 wife assault complaints were filed in 1972; 14,167
wife abuse complaints were filed in New York in 1972. In Washington, D.C.,
between 7,500 and 10,000 complaints of martial violence are received in the
Citizens' Complaint Center every year.3
A study of family violence found that about 60 percent of the husbands and
wives has used physical aggression during a martial conflict.4 Of a sample of
more than 1600 families seeking help from family agencies throughout the U.S.,
15.6 percent reported physical abuse as a problem.4
A 1976 survey conducted by the Battered Women's Task Force of Milwaukee,
Wisconsin indicates the following regarding those spouse abuse victims inter-
-viewed:
Average age was 33.4 years; 70 percent were White; 21 percent Black:
9 percent other; 71 percent were married; 26 percent separated; 3 percent
divorced; average length of relationship with assailant was 9.3 years; average
income of victim was $3,271.
Average income of assailant was $9,782; 48 percent had children; average
number was 2.4; 15 percent reported having needed hospitalization after
beatings; 63 percent of respondents indicated police had been called regarding
the spouse abuse incident (s) ; 71 percent of respondents indicated no charges
- were pressed.5
The high cost of shelter and energy places an added burden on low-income
* families' already limited resources. Low-income persons pay a disproportionate
amount of their monthly income for inferior housing.
Neighborhoods where there is a high concentration of low-income persons
and crowded, substandard housing are often beset by other problems such as
high crime rates. Dilapidated, inadequate housing often contributes to the chronic
health problems of low income persons such as lead poisoning and respiratory
ailments.
Domestic violence is the most critical family problem needing crisis interven-
- tion and treatment. In many cases, domestic violence presents a significant
threat to health and life. In less severe cases, the continuing presence of domestic
violence causes stress and tension within the family which may be manifested in
any number of ways-physical health problems, school problems, and so on.
Alcoholism, drug abuse/dependency, and mental health problems can both
precipitate and exacerbate family crises. For example, the connection between
-alcohol usage and child abuse has been documented. A recent survey indicated
that alcohol was involved in:
32.4 percent of all incest cases; 14 percent of all abuse cases; 18.5 percent of all
-neglect cases; 16.9 percent of all abuse/neglect cases.
Mental health problems even if they are not manifested in family violence,
-can result in job instability, unemployment, financial problems, and marital
difficulties or divorce.
While mental health and substance abuse problems occur across all income
categories, these problems have more negative impact on low-income families
whose access to treatment and counseling is often limited by finances or un-
familiarity with the services available.
Low-income families suffer more severely because their situations are com-
plicated by lack of income, access to resources and lack of awareness of available
- services.
GSA FUNDING OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROJECTS BY PROGRAM YEAR
Funding year: Project Grantee Funding
`Fiscal year 1978:
Family crisis intervention Community Relations-Social Development Commis- $620 455
sion, Milwaukee, Wis.
Training and technical assistance Bureau of Human Resources, Department of Com- 100, 000
munity Affairs, Harrisburg, Pa.
Education and training Massachusetts Coalition of Battered Women's Serv- 100, 000
ice Groups, Boston, Mass.
Total, fiscal year 1978 820, 455
Steinmetz, Susan, Ph.D., "Domestic Violence: The hCallenge to the Criminal Justice
System and Community," paper delivered at the Domestic Violence Conference sponsored
by the National Conference of Christians and Jews, October 1978.
3Marin, Del, Battered Wives, San Francisco: Guide Publications, pp. 11-12.
4Beck, D., and Jones, M. S., Progress on Family Pro blem8, New York: Family Service
Association of America, 1973.
5Task Force on Battered Women, Milwaukee, Wise., October 1976.
PAGENO="0231"
225
PROJECTED PROJECTS (PRESENTLY UNDER REVIEW)
Fiscal year 1979:
National women's clearinghouse on domestic Washington, D.C - $25, 000
violence.
Women's resource and advocacy center Baltimore New Directions for Women, Baltimore, Md_ 156, 229
Baltimore County sexual assault and domestic Sexual Assault Center, Baltimore, Md 100, 000
violence center.
Neighborhood networking National Congress of Neighborhood Women, Brook- 100, 000
lyn, N.Y.
Family impact seminars George Washington University, Washington, D.C. 25, 000
(split funding).
(1980) (133,000)
Housing with service and commercial support Women's Development Corp. (split funding) 100, 000
functions. _____________
Total, projected projects, fiscal year 1979 506, 229
Mr. KRAMER. In lieu of your testimony, neither one of you, as I
~understand it, has really taken a position on this particular piece of
~legislation. Does your agency have a position? Are you evaluating it
now? If so, can you share your thoughts with us?
Mr. FLEMING. HUD is in the process of evaluating legislation from
the standpoint of formal reaction to the specifics. Our position today
is more that of response to the overall issue. We will be making our
position known on the legislation.
Mr. KRAMER. Could I ask the same question of you?
Mr. ALLISON. Our answer is essentially the same. We are in the posi-
tion of reviewing it. I don't think that any decision or position has
~been taken vis-a-vis it specifically, but we certainly want to demon-
strate our support for the concern that the committee has.
Mr. KRAMER. Are you going to take a position as an administration
~or just the Department? Do you not know what you are going to do
at this point?
Mr. FLEMING. Being only 2 years in this exercise, I have learned
from the standpoint of 0MB there is no difference between the posi-
tion of the Department and the position of the administration.
Mr. KRAMER. Is it possible that the recommendation of your Depart-
rnent might be different from the ultimate administration position?
Mr. FLEMING. I suspect it would be unlikely. We would be sharing
* our individual Department's recommendation with that of 0MB
and coming forward with an administration decision.
Mr. KRAMER. Apparently in testimony given by HEW this morning
which, unfortunately, I was not here to hear this morning their posi-
tion was that they were developing their own legislation and had
some amendments to title XX and things like that that they were
pursuing.
Are you familiar with that or not?
Mr. FLEMING. Just having heard it this morning, no, sir.
Mr. KRAMER. When do you think some decision is going to be made
on this? Both of you gentlemen will have a role, I suppose, in that
decisionmaking process.
Mr. ALLISON. Unfortunately, I am in no position to give you a
prognosis of when that is likely to happen. I know the legislation is
imder review. I assume it would be imminent, but specifically I can't
respond.
Mr. KRAMER. Will you have a decision for us prior to consideration
of this bill for amendments?
PAGENO="0232"
226
Mr. FLEMING. What is your timing in terms of scheduling markup?
Mr. KRAMER. Right after the Labor Day recess.
Mr. FLEMING. I anticipate our position will be formed by then.
Mr. KRAMER. If you can do that and provide our office with a copy
of your position on this legislation, I would be most appreciative.
Mr. FLEMING. It occurs to me that not being the obvious Depart-
ment in this area, although we certainly recognize our role and respon-
sibility, we may not have been yet formally requested to respond. To
the extent that is a problem. we will call the committee staff a.nd make
sure we get requested to respond.
We are interested in the subject and certainly would `be most will-
*ing to give the Department's position on the legislation.
Mr. KRAMER. Thank you.
Mr. MILLER. I appreciate your testimony. Both of your statements.
indicate that once again there are ongoing efforts in the Federal
Government in this behalf. I think it again strengthens the case that
if local organizations are in a position to avail themselves a.nd have
the sophistication to avail themselves, they can put together a coordi-
nated effort to try to help people who find themselves in this rather
tra~ic situation.
We don't hold out the illusion that something is not there.
You talk about a Minnesota housing grant under this section 8 pro-
gram. Where I come from, you could not get a sect.ion 8 house no mat-
ter what your situation was. We have people standing in line.
My question is, is section 8 housing really available?
Mr. FLEMING. I think that is a fair point, Congressman.
Mr. MILLER. When you get title XX money, will you find there is
any?
Mr. FLEMING. We have been accused of a lot of problems, but w&
have rarely been accused of having trouble spending money.
The difficulty we frankly have is in maintaining, as you are cer-
tainly are aware, adequate funding for the subsidized housing pro-
grams of this Nation. Even in tight budget times, the administration
has now before Congress a bill in terms of section 8 that would make
it possible to produce something like 300,000 units, recognizing that
there are waiting lists and lines of persons that have been waiting and
need subsidized housing.
Unfortunately, the actions before the Appropriation Committee
thus far would cut that 300,000-unit figure substantially. Your point
is well taken.
We can, on the one hand. facilitate the process and make all the
various programs more conducive to responding to this need, but if
the adequate levels of support for those programs are not maintained,
we are creating an illusion.
I certainly align myself with your point in terms of subsidized
housing. We are having a very difficult time maintaining the level of
funding that the administration is requesting this year for subsidized
housing.
Mr. MILLER. So is CSA?
Mr. ALLISON. That is right.
Mr. MILLER. CSA tells them to go to HUD. which tells them they
don't have resources to put behind this effort. That is my concern. It is~
riot coordination. The legislation I have offered asks for coordinatiorn.
PAGENO="0233"
227
It is a question of going through the machinations so that you appear
to people in the country, the women's community, the child abuse
community and other communities as doing something for them. Don't
tell them section 8 housing. You could not get section 8 housing in
California on a bet. That is my concern. I think they have to under-
stand that is the reason for this legislation. Sure, there are ACTION
volunteers; sure, there is some CSA money. Sure, there is some I-ITJD
money and community block grant money; but if you are not orga-
.nized at the local level, you will never get it. You have to have the
ability to seek it out. That is what we are trying to do. Somebody broke
it down today-I think it was Mr. Coleman, who said-it is about
$300,000 a State. That may be five or six projects. It is trying to give
the1n a lease so that they can get-given the nature of the problem-
themselves together to take advantage of the possibly, just possibly,
finding a house to be renovated, or an apartment house to be reno-
vated for shelter, possibly getting some foster grandparents to help
them with the children. That is the purpose of this legislation.
I hate to see the attention diverted from the very real need of re-
sources to the sort of-
Mr. FLEMING. Mr. Chairman, if I might respectfully disagree, to a
point-
Mr. MILLER. Absolutely. Go ahead.
Mr. FLEMING [continuing]. I think it is not an either/or situation,
Mr. MILLER. I don't want it to be.
Mr. FLEMING. I think we are dealing with need, with respect to
process and fundamental disposition and also needs with respect to re-
sources. I am sympathetic to the problem of resources. Even when
it is not a big budget item, we are before Congress for the neighborhood
self-development bill, $15 million, which is so small it does not appear
as a line item in the Senate. What did the House committee do with
it? They cut it in half, 15 and 15, overall. It is now 5 and 10 over the
:2-year period.
It is very, very difficult, even recognizing budget restraints and so
on, to get adequate resources. I would hate to see us completely focus
on resources and not recognize it in some instances. For example, in
the 19 instances where CETA money was used that probably had more
to do with process and with the fact that the issue got highlighted
somewhere, in the city government, lIPID, area office, whoever it was
that showed a community or a community group how that money
could be used.
So the process becomes quite important as well. I will agree with
you, one certaintly does not replace the other. All the processing in
.the world will not pay for programs if the money is not there, whether
it is public money or private money.
Mr. MILLER. That is exactly my point: It is nice when we are at the.
end of the process that HEW is coordinating; when you are at the
end of the process you will have a list of services that potentially
are available, unfortunately all of which are overextended, before they
take on this constituency, they are all overextended.
My plea is obviously a larger one. But absent that ability to pro-
vide, some resources at the local level, the rest of it won't really happen,
or it will happen in such uncoordinated fashion that it just won't
PAGENO="0234"
228
make sense. That is the point. The process I don't want to become
the focal point, or the diversionary activity away from resources for
the problem.
Mr. FLEMING. They used to call it "creative federalism" in other
days, when the suggestion was that if we just did a lot of reorganiza-
tion and gave them money that that would make the problems go away~.
That was the Nixon administration's label.
Mr. ALLISON. On the issue of resources, I point out, as I have in mv
prepared testimony, that we had requested $3 million so that we cou1d~
do this kind of thing in a demonstration area. It has not been~
included.
Mr. MILLER. We are going to let the Congress shoot down all those
proposals. Then we will have this overwhelming unanimous vote for
this directed money. That will be the difference.
Mr. ALLISON. We try to combine these things, of coordination and
demonstration; what we do in our community action agencies is this
very issue of coordination. We think a better job can be done. We~
support that.
Clearly, we need to look at some of the specific issues related to the
problem. That is why we requested the additional money in the dem--
onstration category.
Mr. KRAMER. In that list you are going to provide me of what you
are spending money on now, will you also include in that list what
you propose to do that you have on the drawing board, that you inti-
mated in your testimony, and include there some dollar figures, if
those are avilable?
Mr. ALLISON. Yes, sir.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you very much.
Finally, the committee will hear from Ms. P. J. Marschner.
STATEMENT OF P.1. MARSCHNER, DIRECTOR OF PROGRAM DEVEL-
OPMENT, CENTER FOR WOMEN POLICY STUDIES; ACCOMPANIED
BY DIANE HAMLIN, DIRECTOR, RESOURCE CENTER
Ms. MAR5OHNER. May I introduce Diane Hamlin, director of our
resource center. It has all the information available. It can answer
any question on what is happening in research and literature. I am
not going to read from my prepared text. If we can have that entered'
into the record.
Mr. MILLER. That will be put in the record in its entirety.
Ms. MARSOHNEI~. Thank you.
The Center for Women Policy Studies has been involved in this
issue on a national level for the last 3 years. We have worked and'
communicated with over a hundred programs. We have also been
involved in an informal Federal level task force that was put together
about a year ago to coordinate those programs that were-
Mr. MILLER. They are different from the HEW?
Ms. MARSOIINER. They are different.
This was put together informally and was not sanctioned because
people working and starting to work in the area of domestic violence
were finding already they were tripping over each other. In other
words, there is a possibility of the same type of grants going out to
PAGENO="0235"
229
look at the problem and so to avoid that duplication the task force
was put together so that informally the Federal agencies could start
communicating with the different project officers within those agencies
so that wouldn't happen, so that they could start working in various
areas and not all in the same area.
The center does not work daily with bruised and battered wives and
children. We don't have direct contact with that clientele. However,
we are in the communities and we are working with those programs
and talking to the people who do run this program. We also have
had the opportunity to work with almost every Federal agency that
has testified here today and have a perspective that is across agencies.
We are not really vested in one although we are funded by LEAA
to be the technical assistance of their programs that they do fund.
Cathie Taylor of Fort Worth, Tex., can't be there today to talk
about the critical and crucial need of emergency housing. She can't
be here to tell you that because she has been in and out of a shelter
at Ft. Worth that has a 3-week residency time limit. After coming
out 2 weeks ago, after staying her 3-week limit, because of overcrowd-
ing, she was shot by her husband.
Lynn Deeda from Nebraska can't be here to talk to you about the
justice system and reform center needed and its practice of handling
domestic violence cases, for the day before her divorce a couple of
months ago she was shot by her husband after the court ordered that
he was nonviolent, after he was psychoanalyzed.
Julie Park Price, of North Carolina, also can't be here to tell you
about what the frustrations in dealing with all the social services and
the frustrations of calling the police and their not responding, for she
took action in her own hands, picked up a gun and shot her husband
and is now serving 20 years in the North Carolina women's correctional
institution.
I have used these examples to illustrate the immediate need for ac-
tion. 1,~Ve can't wait any longer. The Cathies, Lynns, the Julies, they
are happening daily. We need some sort of action now which the Con-
gress can provide through this legislation. As IRepresentative Mikulski
pointed out, with increasing gas lines, rising costs, the shrinking
dollar, the economy, and things that are happening, stressful situa-
tions are arising and this is being reflected in the family.
That is not to say that the causes of violence are only seated in eco-
nomics but it does exacerbate the situation in the family and we are
going to see more and more violence.
The communities that are working in the domestic violence area are
absolutely overwhelmed with the services that they have had to give on
a limited shoestring to these women. Someone testified yesterday that
one of the reasons this issue had not come out is because it is much
easier to ignore, to try to attack all of the things that possibly cause
domestic violence or all the services these families need.
Many women working in hundreds of communities have brought
these issues into the daylight. I want to applaud their efforts. What
they need now is help in changing the attitudes and behavior of those
social services operating in the community. They need to help change
around those people who continue to ignore what is happening with
violence in the family.
PAGENO="0236"
230
Dr. Edelstein testified yesterday and opened his remarks by say-
ing he knew nothing about domestic violence. This is the man who is
the head of the emergency service of one of the largest hospitals in the
District. He testified that he saw three victims last year that were
brutally abused by spouses. I contend he sees a lot more although he
does not recognize it because he has not been reached yet. He is one of
the thousands of people who deliver direct services who has not been
reached by the women's community through lack of funding.
He exemplifies the need to educate this community about family
violence and problems that these families face. He also stated that he
knew of no special programs that are being run in emergency rooms.
This is another need that we have, to exchange this information.
In our newsletter that came out a couple of weeks ago our lead
article talked about all the training that is happening in pockets
around the country in emergency rooms. This information should be
made available to him. That is why a national clearinghouse is needed.
I applaud the efforts of the Federal Government an'd the Federal
agencies to coordinate their programs on this level but would like to
put in a perspective of community needs. We all know that the bu-
reaucracy moves slowly and task force study and plans of action take a
long time to implement before they get down to the local level. These
task force studies are not an aggressive support to the battered
women's constituency and that is what they need at this point.
The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare has opened an
Office of Domestic Violence but not one dime of this money is going to
house, feed, transport, or protect one battered woman. It is only going
to look at the program and provide leadership.
HUD may have changed their community development block grant
regs to include shelter but, Mr. Chairman, as you pointed out, those
funds are highly politicized, limited, and highly competitive. Not
many community programs know how to even apply for these funds,
more or less could ever compete for them. CSA may be providing tech-
nical assistance to programs but who is finding those programs that
they are providing technical assistance to?
I also might add that the one program that CSA has funded, a
$600,000 shelter in Milwaukee, is not what the advocates and victims
are asking for. They are not asking for large monolithic programs
professionally staffed that don't meet the needs of the community.
They are asking for community-run programs. LEAA is the police,
prosecutor, and judge in how to handle domestic violence cases. They
are changing the attitudes within the criminal justice system. Where
are the women going to go to get to the prosecutors and judges? Where
are the police going to take these people?
ACTION may be sending volunteers to the community and partic-
ularly impacting the rural areas which no one has talked about yet.
It has been terribly overlooked.
The rural areas have more limited resources. They may be sending
in volunteers but where can they place the women? Who is going to
answer to the woman who has to walk 150 miles? Will the battered
woman accept only so many pieces of the pie argument that we get
from all the Federal agencies about not being able to fund? `Will this
dialog save the Cathie's, Lynn's, and Julie's of tomorrow or in the
next,6 months?
PAGENO="0237"
231
nub immediate need for emergency shelter programs is real and it
is here today. Those of us with the Federal perspective are already
looking at the long-term effects of violence. We are talking about the
best models. But have we overlooked the obvious possibly because we
don't see the battered women, hear them scream?
Violence in the home is not a new phenomenon nor will it go away,
if ignored. As our society increasingly becomes more complex and
stressful, and as we crowd closer and closer together, we must realize
that our problems also become more. intense. The ideal family life pic-
tured in the women's magazines of the 1950's with the housewife and
husband sitting around the fire nightly and reading to their well-
behaved childern is not a norm that fits the families of today. To say
that we could go back to that picture is like saying Congress could go
back to a 6-month session. The progression of complex issues that con-
fronts the family today does not lead to quick solutions or easy answers.
The legislation before this committee does not ask the Congress or
any Federal agency to solve the entire problem of violence within the
family; it does not ask the Congress to create another Federal agency
staffed with a new classification of workers called domestic counselors;
it does not even ask the Congress to research this problem so that we
can recite statistics confirming a problem we already know exists.
What the victims and advocates are asking for in this bill is leader-
ship from Congress in underscoring the need for more services for do-
mestic violence victims. They are only asking that Congress take a
leadership role in defining violence in this form as a legitimate societal
concern that must be addressed by every community, not just a few. It
must be addressed today.
Thank you.
Mr. MILLER. Thank you.
Mr. KRAMER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
What is your concept of what shelters ought to be doing?
Ms. MARSCHNER. First off, we are dealing with a band-aid approach
right now. I think they first must provide safe shelter for a woman who
lives in danger. I think most of the shelters are taking the approach of
working with the entire family. We all realize that by not working
with the abused and not working with the children we may be missing
a critical point to impact future violence within the family.
I think shelters are approaching it from this level. If in fact they
can get beyond the crucial need of just supplying that safe housing be-
cause it is very expensive for small communities to fund these kinds of
operations, especially on a 24-hour basis.
Mr. KRAMER. Do you have a concept going beyond that description?
Ms. MARSCHNER. Long term? In terms of an overall policy I think we
need to coordinate all the services that are happening in a community
so that it can impact this on a long range time `scale. How do you stop
and prevent violence? We have not even gotten into looking at those
things. That is what some of the research grants are talking about now.
If we can find a causative factor, possibly we can start running pre-
vention programs. I think we need something like section 8 housing.
What happens when you can provide only 3 weeks of `housing to
a woman because during that 3-week period she is not able to make a
decision on furthering her life or make temporary plans? I think what
we need to do, which some of the LEAA grants are doing is working
L~9-91L~ 0 - 79 - 16
PAGENO="0238"
232
from a coordinated base of services where they are bringing in all the
public health, mental health people with the law enforcement agencies
to work together to see if they can stop some of this violence.
Mr. KRAMER. Do you see in your own mind from the study that
you have done in this situation, the shelter movement and all these
other things a response to a new need in our society created by society's
greater complexities or do you feel this is something that has basically
been with us for a long time in the same proportion but has only been
recognized?
Ms. MARSOHNER. We can't talk about proportions because it has
never been looked at before. Because it has never been talked about we
cannot talk about statistics. I think it is happening and it is all part
and parcel of the woman's movement. I think what is happening now
is that people are demanding rights. As people start demanding those
rights they become aware that no longer is that part of the family
pact that someone has the right to beat someone else.
It is also a matter of support. The communities are starting to be
much more supportive of this thing. It used to be embarrassing to
report on a beating, bringing the problem out in the open and talking
about it. Taking away the taboo about it hasn't increased the problem
but it has increased awareness.
Mr. KRAMER. My only involvement, of course, is a number of years
ago, as a prosecutor in a little county court building. That is how I
started. My own reaction to t'he cases that I had was that we were
certainly willing in our office to prosecute these husband-and-wife
situations. Some of them amounted to felonies; some of them were
only misdemeanors. Time after time after time, the reason the greatest
percentage of those cases were not prosecuted-and many of them
could have been prosecuted successfully, if t.here was enough physical
evidence to convince a jury-was simply because the woman involved
did not want to continue with the prosecution. In other words, the
typical case was that a man usually had been drinking; he got carried
away; he pounded on her; and she may or may not have gone to the
hospital. The police were called. He was arrested and put in a jail a
couple of days. By the time the trial was to be held, as I indicated,
the persons who were being abused were so violent in their demands
that the case be dismissed, that it was all a big mistake, that the case
was dropped.
I would say in perhaps 75 or 100 or more instances of assault and
battery, this was the developing scenario.
I guess my basic feeling is that there is a problem. The problem is a
very serious one. But in the case of the individual who is being beaten
upon in the first instance, doesn't the impetus for changing that situa-
tion have to come from the individual? No matter how many pro-
grams you have designed to meet this need, until you change the behav-
ioral patterns of the victims themsleves you are probably not going
to make significant progress.
Ms. MARSCIINER. This is where the change is coming from. The
largest grassroots support and what has been happening in the com-
munity is coming from the victim, is coming from battered women.
As far as why people change and how you change attitudes, I think it
is the cart before the horse.
PAGENO="0239"
233
Do attitudes change when there is no place to go, when there is no
alternative, when community pressure keeps them in the home, when
the economic situations keep them in the home, when they can't go
out and support themselves, when they can't qualify for high enough
paying jobs to support the family at the level they are being sup-
ported now, when public attitudes say there should be a mother and
father to raise children?
There are a lot of public attitudes that keep women in the home.
Women go back time after time after a beating. How do you change
those attitudes? That is what we are trying to attack in this legisla-
tion, by opening up programs and giving people some kind of alter-
native to staying in that situation, by showing them that there is an
alternative, and that the community at large will not blame them for
walking out of a situation that could be violent.
Mr. KRAMER. Do you have any statistical data in terms of-I don't
know if you can call them success ratios or not-measured over a period
of time such as 1 or 2 years? What has happened to people who have
utilized the available shelters? Have they ultimately gone back into
their original situation? Has any followup been done to determine
whether or not women served by shelters are "repeat visitors"?
Ms. HAMLIN. Nobody has that information. We. won't have that
information for a long time. The people who are running shelters on
a volunteer basis don't have the wherewithal to track on an ongoing
basis what their clientele are doing.
Mr. KRAMER. This is a familiar pattern. The tradition in this coun-
try for the last 15 years has been, here is a problem; throw Federal
dollars at it and it will disappear. Yet, the years progress, the same
problems exist. What we have ultimately done is build greater bu-
reaucracies and constituencies to service the "problem" not solve them.
If you could really get an honest answer bureaucrats would probably
rather not see the problems they have been established to fight go
away. That would, in effect, mean the elimination of the necessity for
having these very people continue in their jobs.
I am not saying that everybody looks at social problem issues in
this way. However, I read some books which document the fact that
we, in fact, have a welfare industry in our country that is supportive
of the existence of the status quo. Why? Because we have about 2
million people in this country, give or take a few hundred thousand,
who are actively employed not as welfare recpients, but in jobs serv-
icing welfare recipients.
What you build is a tremendous constituency. Yet so many of the
basic problems that these institutions were set up to solve remain. How
can you give us assurances that, in fact, the same thing is not going to
happen with domestic violence, where this familiar pattern has oc-
curred so many times before?
Ms. HAMLIN. I don't think you ought to define solving the problem
as getting the woman out of the home on a permanent basis. I think the
way you might want to define success for social service people is cessa-
tion of violence in the home. That is a very different measure of suc-
cess; that is one of the reasons that perhaps what we want to look at is
not who has returned or who hasn't, but who has not been beaten again.
Those are the measures you want to look at for measures of success.
PAGENO="0240"
234
Mr. KRAMER. I agree. That is why I asked you if you have any infor-
mation that would lead us to conclude that persons who have been
served by shelters now have a greater future than they would have had
they not had the benefit of the shelter and related services.
Ms. HAMLIX. I think that is au important question. I think that is a
question that is asked too early on, what we know and what is being
done in terms of stopping the violence on a permanent basis.
LEAA has already begun taking steps in that direction, to put to-
gether a meaningful program of people who have been working profes-
sionally with batterers and will be producing a document out of that
meeting in the next few months. It will be a good help to people pro-
viding shelter. These people are the pioneers.
Mr. KRAMER. For my own information, has either one of you been
either victims of domestic violence or have you worked direct~1y on a;
1-to-i basis with people who were battered?
Ms. HAMLIX. The Family Circle magazine that we have worked with
before on the problem did an article and ran our phone number in their
magazine. It resulted in a slough of phone calls from women who had
just been beaten. The clerical staff at the Center spent a lot of time in
the space of 6 weeks talking to battered women and trying to refer
them to appropriate places throughout the country because they didn't
know there was anyplace they could call. They did not have anyplace
they could call before.
Ms. MARSCHNER. We don't work in any kind of ongoing capacity
with direct clients. What we try to do is work with the programs and
localize the services, because that is where they need to be.
To address your question about creating a bureaucracy, that is what
this legislation, hopefully, :~5 targeted to avoid. These people want to
keep control of the programs at the local level because those are the
people who know what kind of programs these individuals need. A pro-
gram that is set up in Price, Utah, is not going to be the same program
as one that is set up in Alaska, which meets a very different clientele.
It deals with many different cultural and cross-cultural problems and
could not be run on a Federal basis. What this is asking for is to place
the money in the locality so that the locality can start to recognize this
problem and to organize around it, so that they can start meeting the
needs of these local women. That was the whole thrust of this legisla-
tion. It has a 3-year tag on it, and that ends it. You have 3 years to
organize and start running it locally.
Mr. KRAMER. I can tell you this as a State legislator. First, organizers
of programs whose Federal funding is coming to an end come running
to the State legislature for help. The legislature, which has not had
any involvement in setting up the program in the first place, is not
too particularly pleased to have the program thrown in their lap as
the Federal Government withdraws. Or, what happens is that grants
become available in new areas. Therefore the first program is dropped
and another one started, because that is where the new Federal dollars
are available. I have sat on the board of directors of mental health
centers and can tell you that is what has actually happened.
Ms. MARSCHNER. You are talking here about a constituency that has
a vested interested in running these programs for these victims. These
are former victims who are running it. These are people who are com-
mitted. That is why all through the thrust of the legislation it is to
PAGENO="0241"
235
put the money in the hands of the people who are currently running
programs or identifying those communities where that kind of group
could be put together to run a program, where there is no program
now. That also was a concern and thought in writing this legislation.
I hope that has been covered, so that you don't have the consulting
firms coming in; so you don't have the $600,000, multifacted, large,
professionally staffed program that you have seen in other areas, like
mental health.
Mr. MILLER. Let me interject here, let me state to Mr. Kramer, be-
cause I think his comments are exactly the fears that a lot of people
have about this program, they are the fears I have about it, I am not
terribly interested in being the author or the creator of a new Federal
bureaucracy. First of all, I don't believe it will work.
The original legislation bypassed everybody and said you give the
money directly to a local organization that established itself, has shown
other sources of community support. I would be delighted to sit down
with you before we go to the markup and talk about how we avoid
those pitfalls.
I am very serious as the author of this on the 3-year provision. I
think other communities, because of this initial effort, and because of
what is going on with volunteer agencies in other Federal programs,
other communities will at some point start to take responsibility for
their families in that community and will provide the resources. If
they don't, I don't think it should be a Federal problem, but I think
at a time when you are making a transition in the country's life as to
awareness, that there is a proper role for the Federal Government to
try to help those local people who have made that effort, who are trying
to be out there; but after that has gone by and after you have given
it a test run, if there is no interest, if the community believes that
men should beat women, there should be no penalty and life is tough
all over, then that is another statement.
I don't think we should foster my view of what the Federal Govern-
ment should be doing. I would hope we could sit down and go over
this, to allay those fears. I think it is important that it happen, but
not that it consume a building down here or anywhere else, where all
of the people have directed to them our solutions to their problems.
That is my biggest concern. These people have been creative; they
have dedicated a lot of time and effort to doing it. To the extent we
can support them, it is one thing. To the extent we overtake them, I
don't want to play the game.
[Prepared statement of P. J. Marschner follows:]
STATEMENT BY P. J. MARSCHNER, CENTER FOR WOMEN POLICY STUDIES,* BEFORE
THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SELECT EDUCATION, COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR,
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES-WEDNESDAY, JULY 11, 1979
The Center for Women Policy Studies has been involved in the domestic vio-
lence issue at a national level for the past 3 years. In these 3 years, with a grant
from the Law Enforcement Assistance Administration (LEAA), we have had
the opportunity to travel to 30 States and visit with various programs designed
to aid domestic violence victims. We have spoken or met with hundreds of local
social service providers, medical personnel, prosecutors, researchers, administra-
tors, government policymakers and concerned citizenry. We have been involved
from the beginning in Federal agency planning of programs for domestic yb-
*The Center for women Policy Studies is an independent, nonprofit corporation address-
ing legal and economic policy issues affecting women.
PAGENO="0242"
236
lence victims. We have participated for the last year in an informal Federal task
force concerned with coordinating various agency grants that included repre-
sentatives from LEAA, Community Services Administration. Civil Rights Com-
mission, Department of Labor, Department of Health, Education, and Welfare,
National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect, National Institute of Mental Health,
National Institute on Alcoholism, and Alcohol Abuse, and ACTION. In addition,
we have been involved in the development of this legislative initiative and have
worked closely with congressional staff members in outlining a Federal strategy
for aiding victims of domestic violence.
Our organization does not deal daily with bruised and battered women and
children. Our community perspective comes not from being a direct service
provider but from ongoing communication with community programs, and with
women who are now struggling to break a pattern of violence in their lives or
who have successfully extricated themselves from a violent situation. We have
listened to these women and the people who try to aid them talk about their
problems, their frustrations, and their anger at government systems they pre-
sumed would help them when they were in distress.
We have also had the opportunity to cross agency service lines and see how
the various programs interact and interrelate. Not oniy have we worked with
the Federal agencies and seen their programmatic responses to domestic violence,
but also we have maintained an information exchange with State, county, and
local programs about their services and needs. Thus, our perspective on federal
policy i's tempered by the realities of local programing and the frustrations of
communities in trying to translate Federal ideals into a viable plan to action.
Given that the Center for Women Policy Studies seem.s to have a stance in both
the community and the Federal Government, I would like to share with you our
collective experience with domestic violence programs and policy and our inter-
pretation of the federal role in this issue.
In 1974 Erin Pizzey, with her book Scream Quietly or the Neighbors Will
Hear, initiated a public campaign against wife beating in England that has
spread across the globe, including North America. We doubt whether Ms. Pizzey
ever dared to dream how far her scream for help would be heard. Witness the
fact that in 1976 there were no more than five places in this country where
women with children fleeing a violent situation could be sheltered. Today,
although a paucity of services still exists and has been well documented in
these hearings, an abused woman in need can now at least find a sympathetic
ear if not a local support group, legal advice, referral, and possibly, if she is
very fortunate, a shelter. However, convincing a few people that men do beat
their wives and that lovers do kill each `other is not enough-it isn't even the
bare minimum needed to confront this violence, much less to stop it.
Services for victims of domestic violence have grown during the last five
years in this country but this expansion has been painfully slow when compared
with the millions of women and children exposed to brutality yearly. While the
ranks of advocates are growing, services continue to limp along when in some
cases victim needs could be met by a simple policy or procedural change. For ex-
ample, when police are responding to domestic violence calls, they could carry
referral cards with telephone numbers of various emergency and counseling
services. They could leave this card with the victim so that when the immediate
crisis is over she could seek help. Many communities believe that if they had
more funding, they could start addressing the family violence problem. However,
a small procedural change like referral cards is a start, and that cost is minimal.
The reason for the slow integration of this problem into community serv-
ices lies beyond the governmental shrinking dollar and in community percep-
tions of violence in the home. Traditions die hard, and violence has been buried
deep within the social fabric of families for centuries. The traditional perception
of the American family as a loving, nurturing institution has long obscured the
fact that spouse beats spouse, and lover kills lover. Although there is a growing
number of concerned citizens in the communities who see the future ramifica-
tions of continuing to lock violence within the home; and of citizens who see
that the children of violent homes are the violent parents of tomorrow, their
collective concern is not enough. They are not able to provide adequate housing
and referral without the support of the institutions established to work in
social service areas.
Institutions within the society also have traditions in whom they serve and
how they serve them. I do not have to remind anyone here that the mechanisms
of bureaucracy change very slowly and domestic violence, because it happens
PAGENO="0243"
237
within the sanctity of the home, does not lend itself to the established social
service procedures all geared to keep families together, even if they are violent.
For example, a family unit can qualify for immediate emergency relief if they
are in need of housing. The definition used here of "family" is father, mother,
children; the same definition used by most government agencies. A married
woman, in most states, who has fled a life-threatening situation cannot qualify
for emergency relief until she files for divorce or separation which is not only
prohibitively expensive when you have fled without a dime, but can also take
weeks. A woman fleeing violence does not have weeks to find a home; she may
not even have hours.
Victims of domestic violence demand many services which do not come under
the currently defined purview of any one agency. Therefore, because no one
agency is taking a lead, these victims are falling between the service gaps. A
woman who needs housing, relief, medical care, legal representation, and job
training and has children who need service also is a social service nightmare
for the number of agencies that must be involved. This woman then is usually
moved to a low priority in terms of help since her needs will generally over-
whelm one agency.
Some communities, through the efforts of very dedicated women, have been able
to organize around this issue of violence in the hom~ and have been able to
offer a limited alternative to withstanding abuse. But these women are still
working with existing attitudes about domestic violence; still trying to enlist
the support of local police, prosecutors, social service agencies, clergy, and
citizen groups and convince them that domestic violence is a community prob-
lem and it does affect the entire community through higher crime rates, dis-
proportionate use of social services by a few, unnecessary hospital care, run-
away youth, and even loss of life. We are still trying to convince helping agencies
that women do not stay in violent situations because they like them. In spite
of this work for the last 5 years "Domestics," as they are referred to by the
police, in most agencies still constitute the lowest service priority.
And w-hat about the majority of communities where the handful of concerned
citizens have not been able to change "the system's" view of domestic violence
cases? What do the abused women do in these communities? Where do they go
for help? Do they file class action suits against the police as in New York City
and Cleveland, and wait years for a judicial decision? To whom do they look
for help amidst changing "systems" and attitudes?
Our experience in the field suggests they are looking to enlightened Federal
policymakers like yourselves to help lead the way in bringing this problem into
public light. They are asking the Congress to help change the communities'
acceptance of violence within the home; to help cut short the long road to pre-
venting this violence.
We w-ho are involved in this effort would like to see this leadership role ex-
tended well beyond a Congressional endorsement, to a Federal agency recognition
that domestic violence is an integral part of the problem areas for which many
agencies are already responsible. The victims of domestic violence are constitu-
ents in virtually all programs run by the Federal agencies. Earlier I listed
Federal agencies that participated in an informal task force on domestic vio-
lence programming. The people who attended these informal meetings were
from various sectors of the government and all recognized one factor; that
domestic violence cases somehow fall in their programmatic areas. From hous-
ing, health care, child abuse and neglect, runaway and homeless youth, and
mental health services to poverty programs, volunteer programs, labor programs,
criminal justice programs and civil rights violations, the services these pro-
grams deliver all have victims of domestic violence within the clients they
serve. These victims, because of their cross-agency needs and lack of advocacy
support, have received minimal attention by the Federal Government.
The administration has just presented its current programs and plans for
working with domestic violence cases. We would like to applaud these initial
efforts by the administration but at the same time put them into a perspective
of community needs.
For women who flee a violent home situation, housing is a critical factor.
Not only will they and their children need emergency shelter, but eventually
they may also need second-stage housing and possibly a permanent residence.
This is particularly critical in rural areas where housing is very limited,
even on a rental basis. To address the housing needs of these victims, HUD has
changed the requirements for getting Community Development Block Grant
PAGENO="0244"
238
(CDBG) monies which are not available to rural areas. Under this regulation,
battered women's shelters can now qualify for funding. However, adding
shelters to one regulation has not significantly changed the housing outlook,
since HUD has not supported this change by explaining to small community
groups how to apply for these highly competitive and limited funds. The com-
munities need to be schooled on how most effectively to utilize the programs
within HUD and how to answer creatively the housing needs of women and
children in crisis situations. The community needs to approach domestic vio-
lence victims with more to offer than a 3-day stay in a soon-to-be-condemned
building.
Cathie Taylor of Fort Worth, Tex., cannot be here to testify today on the criti-
cal need for safe housing. Cathy was shot by her husband on June 19, 1979, a
day after returning home from an overcrowded shelter that had a 3-week resi-
dency limit. How many Cathie Taylors are there in our communities? We could
pull from our files hundreds of press clippings that read like Cathie Taylor's
story, but for these women it is too late for action.
Other agencies, as reflected in their testimony, have started exploring pro-
gram potential and we support this action but remind you that their efforts are
not intended to establish the shelters, the counseling the protection or the
referral for domestic violence victims. The Federal-level action has been limited
to an assessment of types of services appropriate for these victims and to support
the dissemination of emerging information and experience. ACTION has sup-
ported 10 regional technical assistance grants to help local groups exchange
knowledge and will also be supporting conferences so these providers can develop
plans of action. But what of encouraging more VISTA involvement, broadening
outreach of the Mini-grants programs; can these programs be made more avail-
able to help establish community shelters and services?
The Community Services Administration (CSA) has stated that it has a strong
commitment to victims of domestic violence and has funded two state coalitions
against domestic violence to do training with local groups. These grants will help
develop and integrate the emerging approaches to domestic violence. However,
CSA has also funded a $600,000, professionally staffed family violence clinic in
Milwaukee that is neither responsive to the needs of domestic violence victims
nor is this the level of assistance these victims seek. Large grant programs are
impossible for small advocacy groups to compete for or administer, and also im-
possible for communities to sustain without continued Federal aid.
The Department of Health, Education, and Welfare (DHEW) has recently
shown its commitment to the problem by opening an Office of Domestic Violence.
We hope this office will look at all agencies under the umbrella of DREW that
could serve domestic violence victims and include them in their programing. The
clients served by AFDC, foster care, child abuse and neglect, runaway youth, day
care, public service, drug and alcohol abuse, and mental health could include
the selfsame families served by the battered women's shelters in any community.
What is needed now is a strong mandate from the Secretary for all these pro-
grams to start exploring the potential they have to coordinate services. We
would also like to stress and underscore this point: The new Office of Domestic
Violence will not be granting any direct service moneys. None of the funds in-
volved in this office will house, counsel, feed, or transport one battered woman.
This office will only investigate the possibilities of services within DREW and
formally coordinate those services with other agencies.
The Department of Labor (DOL) has been one of the few agencies providing
funds to establish community shelter programs. Through its CETA programs,
moneys have been provided for staff positions, thus enabling programs that aid
domestic violence victims to open their doors. When these programs open, the
demand for services has been so overwhelming that programs have had little time
to plan future funding strategies for when the 18-month CETA contracts expire.
Community groups not only need the labor to run programs, they also need ex-
pertise on how to continue managing a local programing effort.
The LEAA has led the Federal initiative in family violence by funding demon-
stration projects for 3 years. It has funded 16 community domestic violence pro-
grams and will be funding an additional 9 in the fall. These programs are not
all shelter programs but include police projects and prosecutor projects. LEAA
is working on how to change criminal justice policies in domestic cases. Al-
though new policies have been based on the results of these 25 demonstrations,
it will take time to undo the law enforcement practices that adversely effect
victims of domestic violence. How can the LEAA expand its view to extend more
PAGENO="0245"
239
aid to these victims and how can the justice community be encouraged to address
itself to these victims?
The Department of Defense (DOD) must also look within its ranks to see how
much household violence is being covered up because of military policy. Military
dependents are in the precarious situation of being in a social service fishbowl.
They are tied to a system that discourages reporting because seeking help can
directly affect the career of the breadwinner. The DOD must ask itself how it
can change this situation and actively seek to lessen violence within the services.
CONCLUSIONS
What do the battered women and children of this country have to look forward
to? Will they accept the "only-so~many-pieces-of-the-pie" argument concerning
the reasons why safe shelters cannot be funded? The administration is starting
to study these program areas now, seeing where this problem should fit. But
this will not save a Cathie Taylor tomorrow or even in 6 months. The immediate
need for emergency shelter programs is real and it is here today. Those of us
~rith a Federa' perspective are already looking at the long term effects of violent
homes and we are overlooking the obvious, possibly because it's easy to ignore
when you do not see the scars or hear the screams of the victims.
Violence in the home is not a new phenomenon nor will it go away, if ignored.
As our society increasingly becomes more complex and stressful, and as we crowd
closer and closer together, we must realize that our problems also become more
intense. The ideal family life pictured in the women's magazines of the 1950's
with the housewife and husband sitting around the fire nightly and reading to
their well-behaved children is not a norm that fits the families of today. To say
that we could go back to that picture is like saying Congress could go back to a
6-month session. The progression of complex issues that confronts the family
today does not lead to quick solutions or easy answers.
The legislation before this committee does not ask the Congress or any Fed-
eral agency to solve the entire problem of violence within the family; it does not
ask the Congress to create another Federal agency with a new classifica-
tion of workers called domestic counselors; it does not even ask the Congress
to research this problem so that we can recite statistics confirming a problem
we already know exists. This legislation does not ask for monolithic programs
that are staffed with extensive professionals, nor for permanent Federal assist-
ance. What the victims and advocates are asking for in this bill is leadership
from Congress in underscoring the need for more services for domestic violence
victims. They are only asking that Congress take a leadership role in defining
violence in this form as a legitimate societal concern that must be addressed
by every community.
Mr. MILLER. With that, the committee is adjourned.
Thank you for your testimony.
[Whereupon, at 1:40 p.m., the hearing was adjournd, the subcom-
mittee to reconvene subject to the call of the Chair.]
PAGENO="0246"
PAGENO="0247"
APPENDIX
Rockland Family Shelter
for Victims of Domestic Violence
P.O. Box 517
Nyack, N.Y. 10960
Written testimony to be submitted in the report of the
July 10th. and 11th. 1979 Federal Legislative Hearings on
Domestic Violence, Wife Abuse.
From: Ms. Barbara Stern, 93 So. Mary Francis, Tappan, N. Y. 10983
One of the great American myths is the family. It is seen by
society as a focus of love and gentleness, so there is a tendency not
to perceive the actual level of violence which occurs within the family.
It seems that only when violence reaches the extremes of murder and
severe injury to women and children, that society is willing to
acknowledge the existence of violence in the family. It has been
reported that violence is more of an everyday occurence in the
family than anywhere else in American society. Violence is accepted
as a legitimate means of problem solving in all reaches of our society.
In our society, married women are considered to belong to their
Husbands. !to person would interfere in the relationship between
husband and wife, even when the Eusband is violent and the wife is
the vicitm. At the present time, a woman is twice as likely to be
assaulted in her home as she would be anywhere else. Wife beating~~
surfacing as another criDe, like rape and child abuse, that occurs
with sW~eking frequence, but often goes unreported.
Se~facing as the Nation's most common and least, reported crime,
wife beating cuts across all economic, social and é~mic barriers.
Wives of ministers, college professors, doctors and lawyers have asked
for our help in Rockland ~s well as the wives of construction workers,
bus drivers, policemen, taxi drivers. As a nationwide social problem,
the incidence of wife battering is said to be triple that of rape, the
second highest unreported crime.
Not long ago, wife beating was rarely discussed. Even the victims
themselves didn't talk about their situation. They were humiliated by
1their beatings and many of them believed ~hat their problem was unique.
But, in the last two years, we have seen battered wives begin to seek
help and tell of the physical abuse they are suffering at the hands of
their mates. Communities, like Rockland County, are offering ~refug,
(241)
PAGENO="0248"
242
counseling and supportive services for these women and their children.
Nobody knows the exact extent of the problem, but estimates based on
police reports and Family Court records of complaints place at about
one million the number of women being battered and abused each year.
In 1976, there were approximately 3,200 domestic disturbances registered
in Rockland County alone. The Police are reluctant to intervene in
family fights, or domestic disturbances-as they are called, because
they are dangerous.
The prevailing attitude has been that intra-family violence is
a domestic squabble, a private matter that takes place within the
sacred walls of the home, immune to public concern or interference.
"A man's home is his castle". The view of the woman and children as
property still prevails in the socialization of everyone - the police,
lawyers, judges and helping professionals.
The time-honored tradition of wife abuse has become formalized
in customs, religions and laws. Perhaps the best expression of power
that men had over women, even when they married, is the 10th. Commandment:
Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's
House; thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's
Wife, nor his man-servant, nor his maid-servant,
Nor his ox, nor his ass, nor anything that is
Thy neighbor's.
The woman, as you will notice, has been grouped with the animals
and other properties. The stage was set in all religions and indicated
in The Old Testament, The New TeEtament, The Talmud, The Koran, Book Of
Norman - allowing a man the right of ownership over the property and
people that comprise his wealth.
Secular laws picked up the religious sanctioning of wife as
prdperty as it is bound up with the common law of ceneent in marriage.
As such, the right of the man to "chastise" his wife was looked upon-
found in many places- and is still looked upon, as.his right and his
duty. The image of law and order has, in many instanc~es, very little
to do with Justice.
The repercussions of the problem of wife abuse extend beyond the
bounds of one family or a single relationship. Domestic violence has
the potential to increase the incidence of abuse in families:for
successive generations. We have begun to confirm, here in Rockland with
the clients we have been servicing, and what we have been hearing from
researchers all over the country there is a "cycle of violence".
Children who witness violent acts between their parents or who are the
victims of parental violence, often grow up to become the wife abuser,
the victims and the child abusers of tomorrow
Wives seeking relief from abuse come up against an overwhelming
series of pressures from society, as well as legal and social-service
systems that view domestic violence as a private problem.
PAGENO="0249"
243
We protect the sanctity of the home, but not the women in it.
More often than not, monies allocated to services for women are
at the lowest priority level. Shelters are difficult to fund because
people assume they are going to destroy home life. In reality, a
violent home is already destroying life - roth body and soul.
Society has played a role in creating the myth of the sanctity of
the home. The time has now come for society to develop a consciousness
that this is no longer a shame, but this is a crime.
Physical violence is not a husband's right in marriage, nor is
it a man's x~ight in any relationship violence negates the concept
of human dignity and equality. A phys.i.cal assault is an invasion of
bodily integrity and a violation of freedom of self determination.
No one has the right to beat up on anyone else's body.
Family violence is not acceptable.
PAGENO="0250"
Testimony to the Select Subcommittee on Education:
Minnesota Social Service Association supports HR 2977, the
Domestic Abuse Bill. MSSA representing nearly 3,000 welfare and
social workers, nearly all the County Welfare Boards and many
private agencies in Minnesota, through unanimous action at our
Delegate Assembly, specifically urges federal action to provide funds
for child abuse and battered women programs.
Our Delegate Assembly also asked for state action to expand the
battered women programs,which Governor Quie and the Legislature did
during its past session. The Legislature also acted to put $100,000
for training and $100,000 for demonstration grants in child abuse
programs immediately because of the urgent and critical need for
action. This was done without even waiting for final action on
the comprehensive Child Abuse Act, which was passed unanimously by
our House Health and Welfare Committee and is expected to pass early
next year. We also moved immediately to strengthen our child abuse
reporting law and definition because of the urgency of the problem
as reported by welfare workers and county Boards.
Nearly 27,000 people were helped by our five demonstration
programs for battered women in the state, and we are hoping to ex-
pand these to all parts of the state if federal funds are there to
help match the state and local funds already pledged to these pro-
grams. The counties are spending nearly $12½ million on protective
services of which 2/3 is local monies. All of the battered women
programs are turning away persons now, even in the limited areas
they serve. Eight out of 10 of the women coming to these battered
women centers have children too. Our county welfare departments
report large increases in the numbers of child abuse cases.
Training funds and demonstration grants are needed on a matching
basis and Minnesota is ready to match those funds now. In fact,
authorization requested should be $25 million, $35,000 and $45,000.
Battered women programs and child abuse programs are two of our
top priorities for Minnesota.
Copy to: Rep. Paul Simons, Chairman
Select Subcormttittee on Education
House Labor and Education Committee
Rayburn Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20515
614 portland avenue, St. paul minnesota 55102~ (612)225-7871
244
minnesota social service association
deanna foster, executive director
July 9, 1979 From: Dr. Blue Carstenson
i ative Director, WSSA
Congressman Arland Erdahl
Room 1017 Longworth Building ``1 /; Ji , N
House of Representatives ,` , ,
Washington, D.C. 20515 `
/ /`
G~3
PAGENO="0251"
245
PREPARED STATEMENT OF RUTH NOREENBROOK, CHAIRMAN, COM-
MITrEE OF WOMEN AND CRIMINAL JUSTICE ON BEHALF OF THE
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION
Mr. Chairman, members of the Subcommittee, we appreciate
this opportunity to present the views of the American Bar
Association on H.R.2977. I am Ruth Nordenbrook, a member of
the Section of Criminal Justice of the ABA and the chairperson
of that section's Committee of Women and Criminal Justice.
The ABA Criminal Justice Section's 9,700 members represent
all of the various aspects of the criminal justice system - -
federal and local, bench and bar, law professors and students,
law enforcement, and correctional officers. The 250,000 plus
members of the Association as a whole are equally, if not more,
diverse in terms of their representation of the various aspects
of the legal community in America.
As for myself, I am currently an Assistant United States
Attorney in the Eastern District of New York. Previous to my
migration to New York last summer, I spent five years as a
deputy prosecuting attorney in King County, Washington; two
years as a staff attorney with Seattle Legal Services; a year
as a Reginald Heber Smith Poverty Law Fellow with the Cook
County Legal Assistance Foundation in Chicago and one year as
a VISTA volunteer in Yakima, Washington.
In the course of those years I have had occasion to repre-
sent the victims of domestic violence directly. I have also
known the difficulties of representing the state in its law
PAGENO="0252"
246
enforcement efforts against the perpetrators of domestic assaults.
In the latter capacity I have known the frustrations which cause
prosecutors and police to abandon hope and, sometimes, to abdi-
cate their responsibility to enforce the law in this area.
We welcome this opportunity to express concerns about
domestic violence and to comment on H.R.2977 in the light of
established Association policy. Certainly, the problem of
domestic violence is not unfamiliar to most lawyers who practice
in a number of areas -- in the criminal courts, in the family
and divorce courts, and in the juvenile courts -- and the
Association consequently has had occasion to give serious atten-
tion to the phenomenon of domestic mayhem for a considerable
period of time.
Both the Section of Criminal Justice and the Section of
Individual Rights and Responsibilities have produced reports
and recommendations which were ultimately adopted by the ABA's
House of Delegates. At the Association's 1978 mid-winter
meeting, the House passed a resolution which formally expressed
the group's support for federal, state, and local efforts to
combat the incidence, causes, and effects of family violence and
for programs to protect the victims of family violence. See
Appendix "A" for a copy of this resolution. At the annual
meeting in August, 1978, the House considered and adopted a more
detailed resolution which had its genesis in the Committee of
PAGENO="0253"
247
Women and Criminal Justice and which urged several concrete
initiatives aimed at exposing the magnitude of the problem,
understanding its true nature, and creating an integrated
response which recognizes that intra-family assaults have both
a criminal and a domestic aspect and that violence in the home
results in maiming and death as certainly as violence in the
street. The resolution, however, also recognizes that the fact
that the locus of the event is the home of necessity calls
for a modification in the nature of the adjustment which the
criminal justice system makes. See Appendix "B" for a copy of
this resolution.
In most violent encounters it seems sufficient to separate
the contenders and, if necessary, to isolate and lock away the
aggressor for a time. In domestic assaults, however -- although
there is no possible question about the need to separate and
protect -- the complicated chemistry of habit, need, social
conditioning, and human and financial dependency preclude any
facile solution predicated upon locking up the offender, and,
if need be, throwing away the key. The limited data available
indicates that although women may push or shove their mates,
the perpetrator of a serious domestic assault, short of homi-
cide, is usually a husband, father or other male intimate of
the female victim. In addition, if the pattern or cycle is
left to run to what appears statistically to be its coiinnon con
clusion, the aggressor, in the end, may become the victim of
`~g-g1'4 0 - 79 - 17
PAGENO="0254"
248
the irrevocable violent act, a murder. Where communities have
managed to keep statistics which distinguish reports of assaults
in the hone from other assaults and similarly, which separately
note homicides among spouses, the statistics are shocking and
should give responsible law enforcement authorities serious
pause to question whether the response which society Ms
traditionally made is adequate.
There are a number of areas where the provisions of the
H.R.2977 presently coincide with recommendations adopted by the
American Bar Association. First, a common priority shared by
this legislation and the ABA's policy is support for the concept
of community based shelters to provide refuge for the victims of
domestic violence and their children. The bill recognizes,
implicitly, that total isolation of the victim from her abusive
spouse may be necessary to insure her safety and provides for
the keeping of the address of the "safe" house a secret if such
a measure is requested by the victim. The ABA has not addressed
this particular aspect of the shelter concept but it seems to me
to be a reasonable provision given the highly volatile nature of
domestic altercations.
Second, H.R.2977 authorizes, in Section 3(b)(l), grants to
local public agencies arid private nonprofit organizations for
projects designed to prevent incidents of domestic violence and
to assist victims and the dependents of victims of domestic c~riolence.
PAGENO="0255"
249
Although intra-family violence is a problem across the nation,
it is one whose remedy -- if there is one -- must of necessity
be rooted in the local community unit. Thus the legislation
which you are considering, which provides for the distribution
of funds to community agencies, because of their location, can
address the problem. Certainly funds generated by this bill
could be channelled to agencies whose function it would be to
provide counselling programs and supplemental services to the
victims of domestic violence. The funds could also be used to
train counsellors and other critical personnel to deal with the
peculiar problems posed by the domestic violence situation.
Although shelters are a pressing and immediate need, a safe
harbor, they are not enough, by themselves, to help families
break life long patterns of abuse and victimization. The
prevention of domestic violence is a matter of retraining people
about alternative means of dealing with their frustration and
anger. Often such retraining will mean helping them to unlearn
responses which they have carried with them from childhood
(there is some evidence that both the beaten and the batterer
were probably abused children and that the acceptance of violence
as a normal part of life is deeply embedded in the emotional
fabric of troubled families).
The Association's recommendations, however, go beyond
counselling and shelters because of the recognition that there
is another aspect of this tragic problem. The ABA's
PAGENO="0256"
250
recommendations recognize that assaults in the home are also
a severe criminal problem and that, to some degree, the society
a~ a whole must be retrained and instilled with an awareness of
this reality.
For instance, among the local public agencies which-cur-
rently confront the horrors of domestic violence on a daily basis
are the police departments and prosecutor's offices of every
community. Traditionally, it appears, these agencies have
avoided active enforcement of the criminal law against the per-
petrators of assaults in the home because they believe that,
despite the serious and often maiming nature of the injuries
inflicted by one spouse upon the other, the fact that the
beating takes place in the home renders the assault a civil
problem to be resolved by lawyers, the family and divorce courts
and/or restraining orders, rather than by the exercise of the
power to arrest and detain. The decision to charge has been
governed more by the relationship between the parties than by
the nature of the act.
Also the law enforcement officer's remembrance of past
experiences with victims who have vacillated and reneged on
their promise to cooperate in an action against their spouse
conditions the officer's response to each new victim's complaint.
The Association's policy with regard to the role of police and
prosecutors in responding to domestic violence is an attempt to
increase the awareness of law enforcement personnel about the
PAGENO="0257"
251
true nature of the problem and to insure responsible but still
somewhat elastic decisions about whether arrest and prosecution
at~e appropriate given the nature of the crime. Consequently
the Association recommends that, after the safety of the victim
has been assured, the police investigate the crime and make a
decision regarding arrest and referral on the basis of its
investigation, stating articulate reasons for a decision not
to proceed. Similarly prosecutors, in considering complaints
of assaults within the home should be able, at a minimum, to
state a reason for a decision not to prosecute, other than the
fact that the parties are man and wife. The question of whether
a criminal assault has taken place depends on such factors as
whether there is an injury or serious threat of injury, how
serious the injury was, how much force was threatened or used
and whether there was a weapon involved. Only when it has been
affirmed that an assault has taken place should the state recall
that the assault was perpetrated by one spouse upon the other and
seek to find a resolution or penalty. Such measures are also
prophylactic against the otherwise inevitable repetition of the
violent act.
Although the legislation which you are considering does not
directly address the issue of official indifference to domestic
violence as a criminal problem, there is little question but
that the funds generated by the bill could be used to reinforce
PAGENO="0258"
252
and encourage the development of sensitive, responsive procedures
and programs within the law enforcement and criminal justice
systems.
One of the alternatives for police and prosecutors, acting
together as law enforcement authorities and keepers of the public
peace, is the creation of diversion programs for perpetrators of
acts of domestic violence, at least for those perpetrators who
do not have a long history of violent abusive acts. This is an
alternative which the Association supports and which, ostensibly,
could be subsidized with funds allocated under the pending bill.
Diversion could be predicated upon participation and completion
of counselling, which, with the agreement of the victim, could
include other members of the family. A few cities, (for example,
San Francisco) have already tried diversion as a means of dealing
with perpetrators of violent assaults within the home. The exper-
ience of these pioneering communities suggests that. diversion
is a promising approach as long as the state is consistent in
enacting a penalty when the beneficiary of the diversionary
alternative, i.e., the batterer, does not perform as required
under the diversion agreement.
Again, I want to emphasize that the Association does not
view its recommendations as alternatives to one another but,
rather, stresses that domestic violence, from what we know of
it, appears to have no one single cure.
PAGENO="0259"
253
Not all of the recommendations proposed by the Association
are encompassed within or cognizable under the present `proposed
legislation and, indeed, some of them are probably not a matter
for federal action. For instance, the recommendation concerning
the enactment of legislation which would make criminal the knowing
violation of a civil restraining order is something purely within
the province of state law-making bodies.
I believe that the pending legislation is sufficiently
flexible to allow funding not only of the more conventional
social work-oriented domestic violence programs like shelters
and counselling centers but also to allow the funding of special
training programs for police, prosecutors and the bench. When
I speak of programs for police in this area I do not speak of
programs which teach police officers so-called "crisis inter-
vention" techniques to enable them to ignore their law enforce-
ment duties in the domestic violence context. Rather, I mean
training programs which re-educate and sensitize law enforcement
personnel about the assault aspect of the phrase "domestic
assault" and which teach officers methods which encourage and
support the victims of these assaults both in their efforts to
find help and in their efforts to follow through in the prosecu-
tion of the perpetrators. In addition, I believe this bill
would support the creation of innovative parole, probation, and
diversion programs specifically directed at batterers.
PAGENO="0260"
254
The ABA is pleased to see the Congress again address itself
to the appalling and widespread nationwide problem. Domestic
assault is not limited to the homes of the poor or uneducated
but, rather, cuts across the lines of race, class, education
and wealth.
Once again, on behalf of the Association, I thank the
Chairman and the Subcommittee for permitting us to present these
views.
EXHIBIT "A"
RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES
OFTHE -
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION
ADOPTED FEBRUARY, 1978
BE IT RESOLVED, that the American Bar Associa-
tion supports federal, state and local efforts
to combat the incidence, causes and effects of
family violence and supports the implementation
of programs to protect the victims of family
violence.
PAGENO="0261"
255
EXHIBIT "B"
RESOLUTION OF THE HOUSE OF DELEGATES
OF THE
AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION
ADOPTED AUGUST, 1978
Be It Resolved, That the American Bar Association, in implementa-
tion of the policy adopted in February, 1978, supporting efforts to com-
bat family violence, recommends the following:
(1) That shelters or other secure temporary residential facilities, to-
gether with counselling and other support services, be established for the
victims of domestic violence.
(2) That law enforcement officers who respond to domestic violence
calls, after insuring that the victims of domestic assaults and their de-
pendents have been removed to safe places as provided in ~l, investigate
the incidents, prepare written reports, and, in the event they conclude no
criminal charges are appropriate, file written statements of the reasons for
the decisions.
(3) That prosecutors who decline to file criminal charges in domestic
assault cases referred to them by the police, state in writing the reasons
for their decision not to prosecute, and provide the complainant with in-
formation as to alternative procedures.
(4) That specific data related to the frequency, seriousness, and other
characteristics of spousal assault, including disposition of complaints and
the stated reasons for the particular disposition, as well as data on exist-
ing programs designed to respond to such assaults, be collected and an-
alyzed by appropriate government agencies.
(5) That the courts, in the determination of pretrial release, sentenc-
ing or imposition or revocation of probation or parole, not treat the re-
lationship between the parties as the primary factor.
(6) That the state create a mechanism for responding to intrafamilial
violence by establishing diversion programs and by providing counselling
and other support services.
(7) That statutes providing for arrest for violation of protective orders
(civil or criminal restraining orders) be enacted and enforced without re-
gard to the relationship between the parties.
(8) That the victims of domestic violence not be excluded from cov-
erage under victim compensation legislation where they demonstrate the
requisite quantum of injury and where they actually live separate and
apart from assaulting spouses.
The Section's second recommendation was approved by voice vote, with an
amendment recommended by the Board of Governors and agreed io by the
Section. As amended, it reads:
PAGENO="0262"
256
PREPARED STATEMENT OF LARRY L. SmroNs, NATIONAL VICE PRESIDENT,
INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF POLICE OFFICERS
The International Brotherhood of Police Officers (IBPO) is
very concerned about the continuing and extreme problem of
domestic violence. As the representative of 40,000 law enforcement
officers across the country, we are well aware of the ~severity of
the situation and supportive of efforts to prevent and alleviate
the problem.
A call to assist a victim of domestic violence is the most
hazardous type of call a law enforcement officer must respond to.
Intervention in violent family crises is the single largest cause
of police injuries and deaths accounting for 40 percent of injuries
and 20 percent of fatalities.
These calls are also some of the most frustrating. Unfortunately,
the terrible results of violence do not necessarily prevent the
recurrence of such incidents. Again and again officers are called
back to the same homes. These repeated calls are not only a drain
on police time and resources, but they are also an indication that the
problems leading to violence are not being solved.
A total assessment of the impact of domestic violence is impossible
to assess. How many other violent crimes are caused at least in part
by the fact that children who witness violence in their homes come to
believe that violence is acceptable behavior? This ripple effect is
frighten~ng to contemplate.
The legislation before your Subcommittee, in particular the
Domestic Violence Prevention and Services Act, is designed to
contribute toward solutions to these disturbing problems. By providing
PAGENO="0263"
257
seed money to local programs, funds to begiq long term State plans,
and a sum for coordinating and assisting Federal and State efforts,
H. R. 2977 would encourage and support the activities of concerned
citzens who are trying to ease this awful violence.
The IBPO thinks that the sums being asked for in this legislation
are extremely modest and absolutely justifiable. We also believe
that these monies would contribute toward savings in other areas.
It is impossible to calculate the amount each state and municipality
spends on disability retirements and death benefits for officers
and families of officers who were injured or killed when intervening
in violent domestic situations, but we are sure that the sum is
considerable. Consequently, it is important that those people
considering this legislation balance, along with the potential saving
of lives, the potential saving of money when considering the cost of
this bill.
During thetwo previous Congresses, the Senate has demonstrated
its willingness to act on the problem of domestic violence by passing
legislation similar to that pending before this Subcommittee. Last
year the House of Representatives almost had a chance to join the
Senate by passing a House bill. However, as you know, the Domestic
Violence Assistance Act of 1978 was lost in the crush of legislation
before a~journment. The IBPO fervently hopes that the Domestic
Vidlence Prevention and Services Act will be enacted by the 96th
Congress. This legislation is too significant in its potential for
saving lives and preventing the terrifying and debilitating consequences
of domestic violence to be delayed any longer.
PAGENO="0264"
258
PREPARED TESTIMONY OF CONGRESSMAN Wir4ia~r R. COTPER, REPRE-
SENTATIVE OF THE FIRST DISmIcT OF CONNECTICUT AND SPONSOR
OF H.R. 2682
MR. CHAIRMAN, IT IS AGAIN MY PLEASURE TO TESTIFY IN
SUPPORT OF FEDERAL LEGISLATION TO DEAL WITH THE SOCIAL
PROBLEM OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE.
HEARINGS THAT WERE HELD BY THIS SUBCOMMITTEE LAST YEAR
BROUGHT THE EXTENSIVE IMPACT OF VIOLENCE IN THE HOME TO
THE NATION'S ATTENTION. THE PROBLEM IS WIDESPREAD ACROSS
THE COUNTRY AND CONNECTICUT IS NO EXCEPTION.
AS OF DECEMBER OF 1978, CONNECTICUT HAD ESTABLISHED SIX
SHELTERS FOR ABUSED WOMEN. THIS JANUARY THE SEVENTH SHELTER
OPENDED IN THE BRIDGEPORT AREA. ACCORDING TO THE CONNECTICUT
TASK FORCE ON ABUSED WOMEN, OTHERS MAY BE OPENING IN THE
NEAR FUTURE. ALL OF THE SHELTERS PROVIDE 24 HOUR HOT-LINE
SERVICE, AND OTHER SERVICES TO RESIDENTS AND NON-RESIDENTS
ALIKE. MOST OF THE SHELTERS ARE FULL MOST OF THE TINE,
AND UNFORTUNATELY MANY WOMEN AND CHILDREN ARE TURNED AWAY
OR SENT TO OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE, OR EVEN OUT OF STATE
FOR PROTECTION AND ASSISTANCE. STATE AND PRIVATE FUNDING
FOR THESE SHELTERS HAS NEVER BEEN DEPENDABLE. IT IS A
FACT THAT NONE OF THE SHELTERS WOULD BE ABLE TO EXIST
WITHOUT THE HELP OF THE VOLUNTEERS WHO PUT IN COUNTLESS
HOURS EACH WEEKS OUT OF CONCERN FOR THE BATTERED VICTIM.
SMALL COMMUNITY-BASED VOLUNTEER GROUPS LIKE THESE IN CON-
NECTICUT, ARE STRUGGLING ALL OVER THE COUNTRY TO ESTABLISH
THEMSELVES SO THEY CAN CONTINUE WITH THEIR WORK. WE NEED
PAGENO="0265"
259
LEGISLATION WHICH WILL PROVIDE THE TECHNICAL AND FINANCIAL
ASSISTANCE FOR THESE SHELTERS SO THEY MAY BECOME SELF-
- SUSTAINING.
IN MARCH OF THIS YEAR, I INTRODUCED HR 2682 WHICH I FEEL
IS A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION TOWARD COMBATING FAMILY
VIOLENCE. YET, HR 2977 WHICH MY COLLEAGUES MR. MILLER,
MRS. BOGGS, AND MS. MIKULSKI HAVE INTRODUCED IS A GOOD
BILL. WITH THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE OFFICE ON DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION AND
WELFARE, THIS BILL WOULD PLACE THE RESPONSIBILITY FOR
AWARDING GRANTS WITHIN THE NEWLY CREATED OFFICE.
THE NEED FOR SOME GOVERNMENT FUNDING TO DEAL WITH THIS
PROBLEM WHICH CUTS ACROSS EVERY SEGMENT OF SOCIETY IS
ESSENTIAL. PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE BUT IS IS JUST A BEGIN-
NING, AND THE GOALS OF BOTH BILLS ARE SIMILAR. WE NEED
TO DEVELOP METHODS FOR THE IDENTIFICATION, PREVENTION AND
TREATMENT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE. WE NEED TO CHANNEL LIMITED
MONIES TO STATES AND LOCAL COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS TO CREATE
NEW EMERGENCY SHELTERS AND TO MAINTAIN EXISTING ONES. THE
CHRONIC ABSENSE OF INFORMATION ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE HAS BEEN
ONE OF THE MAJOR OBSTACLES IN DEALING WITH THE PROBLEM
AND IN RAISING SUPPORT FOR FEDERAL FUNDING. THE OPERATION
OF A NATIONAL CLEARINGHOUSE ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE WHICH WOULD
GATHER AND DISSEMINATE INFORMATION ON FAMILY ABUSE WOULD BE
PAGENO="0266"
260
INVALUABLE.
ANOTHER SIMILARITY WHICH I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT, IS
THE PROVISION IN BOTH BILLS THAT RESTRICTS FEDERAL FUNDS
TO $50,000 IN ANY FISCAL YEAR OR FOR MORE THAN ONE QUARTER
OF THE PROGRAMS ANNUAL BUDGET. THIS WILL AVOID THE
POSSIBILITY OF DEPENDENCY ON FEDERAL RESOURCES AND PERHAPS
ALLEVIATE THE FEARS OF THIS BUDGET MINDED CONGRESS.
AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO INSERT IN THE RECORD AN
UPDATED LIST OF PROGRAMS AND SHELTERS WHICH OFFER INFORMA-
TION, REFERRALS, SUPPORT, COUNSELING AND EMERGENCY CARE
IN CONNECTICUT: (SEE ATTACHED)
IN CONCLUSION, I WOULD LIKE TO EXPRESS MY THANKS TO THE
SUBCOMMITTEE FOR CONVENING THESE HEARINGS AGAIN THIS YEAR
AND PLEDGE MY WHOLEHEARTED SUPPORT FOR HR 2977, SHOULD IT
BE THE BILL WHICH THE COM1~ITTEE REPORTS.
PAGENO="0267"
261
CONNECTICUT TASK FORCE ON ABUSED WOMEN
HELP FOR BATTERED WOMEN IN CONNECTICUT
Task Force on Abused Women*
do EWCA
1862 East Main Street
BRIDGEPORT, CT. 06610
(203) 334-6154
Task Force on Abused Women*
United Social & Mental Health
Westcott Road
DANIELSON, CT. 06239
(203) 774-2020
Battered Women's Task Force
0/0 STAND
246 Main Street
DERBY, CT. 06418
(203) 735-9553
Hartford Interval House*
do Asylum Hill Church
814 Asylum Avenue
HGRTFORD, CT. 06105
(203) 527-0550
Battered Women's Project*
P.O. Box ~663
MERIDEN, CT. 06450
(203) 238-1501
Task Force on Domestic Violence
c/o Community Health Center
635 Main Street
MIDDLETOWN, CT. 06457
(203) 347-6971
Prudence Crandall Center for Women*
P.O. Box #895
NEW BRITAIN, CT. 06050
(203) 225-6357
Project for Battered Women*
P.O. Box #1329
NEW HATEN, CT. 06505
(203) 789-8104
Genesis House*
c/o Women's Center of Southeastern 2.
P.O. Box ;/572
NEW LONDON, CT. 06320
(203) 447-0366
Epilogue
P.O. Box #673
TOFRINGVON, CT. 06066
(203) 482-1121
-All of the above programs offer
information, referrals, support
and advocacy.
-The programs marked with an (*)
provide shelter services.
-All of the programs need donations
of food, clothing, money and
volunteer hours.
-Shelters are in confidential
locations.
For general information about domestic violence, and about
the situation in Connecticut, contact the CONNECTICUT TASK FORCE
ON ABUSED WOMEN at the address/phone number below.
145 ORANGE STREET * NEW HAVEN, CONNECTICUT 06510. 562-1816
PAGENO="0268"
262
Statement Suht~itted to the
HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SELECT EDUCATION
COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR
POSITION STATEMENT ON DONESTICE VIOLENCE BILL, HR 2977
Sutmitted by:
The Femily Service Aceociation of America
end
The Netionel Conference of Catholic Charitiea
July 27, 1979
PAGENO="0269"
263
On July 11, 1979 oral testimony woo given before the Subcot~ittee
on Select Education for the Coalition of Family Organisations by the Amer-
jean None Economics Association. The Family Service Association of America
as a member of the Coalition supported the statement given at that time.
This written statement is intended to further specify our position and is
jointly submitted with the National Conference of Catholic Charities.
The National Conference of Catholic Charities and the Family Service
Association of America want to express their thanks to the flouse Subcomaittee
on Select Education of the Nouse Education and Labor Coemittee for once again
holding hearings on the very important issue of domestic violence. Becamee
this social problem has long been buried by custom and the unwillingness of
society to admit its exietanca, it is especially important that the Congress
bring enlightened leadership to this matter. Testimony given before this
Subcoomittee last year called attention to alarming statistics at~d helped
establish the credibility of this issue as being of major importance and
epidemic in nature, We hope the Coemittee will expand its area of inquiry
this year to include an analysis of hay federal assistance would beet be
utilired,
For most of this century the Family Service Association has been the
major service organination in this country having cc its single focus and
priority, American families. The National Conference of Catholic Charities
in its sixty-nine year history of reflecting the social concerns of the
church han always had a major comaitment to strengthening families. Our
structures are composed of hundreds of member agencies, thousands of practi-
tioners and many, many thousands of volunteers. Our agencies provide a
~g-gi~ 0 - 79 - 18
PAGENO="0270"
264
variety of services to families spanning the areas of counseling, advocacy
and family life education. It is in all of these areas of professional
and lay activities that our agencies have encountered the growing problem
of domestic violence. The Family Service Association's membership has
indicated, for example, through a study callod the "Family Listening Post"
a growing number of incidences of domestic violence in their coi~unitiea.
The experience of the membership of the National Conference of Catholic
Charities weflffirma the seriousness of this problem. As na~onal organiea~
tions, therefore, we share a strong comaitment and priority concern to
address this problem at the level of federal.policy. We have, therefore,
followed the legislative and bureaucratt~ developments of the 95th and
96th Congress with interest andeoncern.
While our national orgañtmations do not believe that the American
family as an entity is becoming obsolete or is about to disappear, we do
acknowledge that cone very serious problems are confronting families and
that violence is one of the most critical. /
When we look at the problem of violence in families and the - feet that
shelters are ~ ~Gstt~mtia1--rospite fan a .wmaa and
her children, we are confronted by the realities of where the federal
categorical system, whatever its good points, has taken us. If we want
to assist a family in the majority of oases where a woman has chosen to
return to the family, then there is no program and no funding to help
the family. Title XX, if one looks at the Planning Notes published by
NEW, shows little emphasis on families. Indeed, the very goal structure
of Title XX fails to focus on families 0t3 the integrating structures which
our human services system should strengthen. The experiences of our
member agencies do not indicate that Title XX has overcome this problem.
PAGENO="0271"
265
A service provider--especially one concerned with families--must relate
to each individual program through various regulations, structures and
state offices. When enacted, Title XX was intended to fund, at the state
level, new approaches to human services in a non-categorical manner. In
reality, it has tended to subsidize well established, federal categorical
programs in the old patterns. Competition for ouch funding is very keen
and the winners are the non-family-focused categorical programs. It
would be quite difficult, for example, for providers of emergency shelter
programs to gain access to Title XX dollars in most states.
And where are families? And how do we address issues such as dom-
estic violence? If there were the kind of generic office in flEW that related
directly to assisting coamunities to help families, then the issue of dom-
estic violence would have been naturally encompassed in that structure.
But instead, we find a hastily created Office on Domestic Violence
(instead of an Office on Families) which ignores the real problem: the
lack of an explicit family focus inside HEW and inside government generally4
(It might be said that the urgency and dominance of domestic violence
on the national scene is symptomatic of the general neglect and lack of
focus on families--and reflective of the fact that there is now no federal
resource to which service providers can turn for assistance in helping
families involved in the cycle of violence.)
Under this Administration, the Administration for Children, Youth and
Families yes established. This Administration has failed to encourge
leadership or research centrally focused on families within ACYF. We
believe that it should be clearly understood that we do not see this
Office on Domestic Violence as the anawer--or even a realistic begin~ing--
to the need for federal policy makers to become concerned about what is
happening to Amarican families. We support ER 2977 and do not object to
the creation of a new office to deal with this problem, as long as it is
PAGENO="0272"
266
properly staffed by qualified professionals with training and experience
in the field of human services, We do so because there is a clear and
present need for a program to provide crisis intervention on behalf of
abused women and their children. But we believe ouch a program should be
houoëd in a generic Office on Families within ACYF. What is needed is
an appropriate federal response to the larger needs of families in this
society. We support this legislation, and this new office as described
in the legislation, in that context.
Under thin legislation the emphasis should be not only an emergency
shelter but also on what kinds of preventive help we can provide for the
majority of abused women-- those who still reside with their families or
who return to them from their emergency shelters. And we believe that
shelters funded under this legislation should be required to offer the
mption of family counseling to victims living in the shelter and that family
counseling and therapy continue to be made available after the women
has returned to her family. In other words, if this program is to have
any real impact on the cycle of violence in families, then it must address
the need for services to these families. To rehabilitate a family, the
comeitment to services should be available to victims of domestic violence
whether they are in a shelter or not. But we are then confronted with the
problem again inherent in this legislation: the Office on Domestic
Vielence as now described in this legislation only addresses the issue
of the shelter and limited services provided through the shelter. Unless
it is structured and staffed to really address the totality of the problem
of violence in families, we are beck to the old problem that has plagued
us for so long: Row do we help families in this country when there are
so few resources to assist c~s? Row do we administer a program to reach
them? And when will the Congressprovide the leadership to make this happen?
PAGENO="0273"
267
The White flouse Conference on Families which in scheduled for the
Spring of 1981 comes at a time when there in much speculation about
American families and their relative weaknesses and strengths. It is
the responsibility of national organinationo to engage in the process
of looking at the way in which the federal government responds to the
needs and problems of families and to call thin to the attention of the
Congress. It is our hope that we can help thin Subcommittee in the weeks
ahead, before markup, to develop a bill that will be supportive of
families in ite effort to assist victims of domestic violence.
On the following pages we will suggest some changes in the legislation
that should be addressed either in the bill itself of in the language of
the Report that accompanies this legislation.
PAGENO="0274"
268
RECOMMENDATION FOR REPORT lANGUAGE FOR ER 2977
from
The National Conference of Catholic Charities
and
The Family Service Association of America
July, 1979
1. "The Committee, while not specifying this in the legislation because
it wishes to leave some discretion to the Department of Eealth, Education
and Welfare would strongly urge that the Department establish a Bureau of
Families which would be comparable in status to that which has been created
for children. The Committee believes such action to be consistent with
the mission of the Administration for Children, Youth and Families
established by this Administration in 1976.
"Within such a Bureau for Families, should be the office with
administrative responsibility for a program on Domestic Violence. Such
an office should be logically located within a Family Bureau becauee
violence in families not only affects the spouse involved but also the entire
family structure including children and elderlyparents,
"The Committee suggests that the Office on Doestic Violence
within the Family Bureau structure engage in collection of dats and
basic research to determine the extent of violence in families, It should
do this in conjunction with program administration which determines the
kind of treatment having the most success in rehabilitating individualB
and families."
2. "While the Committee is leaving some discretion in the legislation to
the Department of ?lealth, Education and Welfare, the Committee intends that
projects which would be supported by this grant in aid program would be
required to offer a variety of services including family counseling.
The Cormittee believes, however, that family counseling should be
accessible to only those victims for when it is feasible and acceptable.
PAGENO="0275"
269
"Further, the Coimnittee directs the Department that prevention
as provided by this legislation should not only reach the victim seeking
emergency shelter and services away from the home (intervention) but also
should include the victim who returns to his or her family (prevention).
The majority of victims leaving a shelter return to their families.
Assistance to a family, in which there is violence, and rehabilitation for
its members can occur if services are available beyond the time the
victim is residing in the shelter. For those victims choosing not to
return to the family environment, follow-up services are also needed."
PAGENO="0276"
270
TESTIMONY OF NATIONAL BOARD, YWCA
ON H.R. 2977, MIKULSKI-MULLER DOMESTIC VIOLENCE BILL
FOR THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON SELECT EDUCATION, HOUSE COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND
LABOR, HONORABLE PAUL SIMON, CHAIRPERSON
The National Board of the YWCA of the U.S.A. is pleased to support this legis-
lation, which represents, we believe, a modest but valuable beginning attempt
to do what can be done through legislation to solve a serious national problem
whose dimensions are-only now emerging to public view. We are grateful for the
opportunity to present testimony for the record of the hearings which the Sub-
comittee on Select Education is conducting~ at this time. We believe that the
bill, in its provision for distributing grants to corirnunity-based programs to
prevent domestic violence and help its victims, is on the right track.
The YWCA of the U.S.A., a movement of 2½ million members and participants, with
program in over 600 locations in every part of the United States, is providing
services for victims of domestic violence in more than 200 member Associations,
according to our statistical reports for 1978. Our programs are in great de-
mand; the facilities are often strained, and the staff underpaid and overworked.
Extensive cadres of trained volunteers are used. Despite problems, the chief
of which is funding, morale is high in these programs. `I feel my life has
been worthwhile these last three years," said the Executive Director of the
Salt Lake City YMCA to me, "because of what we have been able to accomplish in
our program for tattered women and their children." She told of many cases--
one she wanted t appear in this testimony concerned a three-year-old boy who
came to the center with ulcers because his father had constantly-shaken him and
his baby sister so severely that they screamed in pain. After three weeks in
the center, the boy was able to eat again. The co-director of the center in
Cortland, New York, said that at first the police said there was no problem in
their county, but after talking with them for a short time, the police revealed
that more than half their calls at night were cases of family disturbance.
Stories like these, of which there are hundreds, document a hidden tragedy of
violence against helpless children, wives, and even mothers. One mother of
a medical student was constantly beaten by her son, and felt powerless to help
herself without harming the son she loved.
Very often the YMCA is the corrinunity organization which initiates programs for
battered women and their children, working in cooperation and collaboration
with many others: mental health associations, human resources agencies, police,
hospital emergency personnel, the Salvation Army, other women's organizations,
Legal Aid societies and local bar associations, medical and nursing associations,
religious institutions, and local welfare agencies. Because YWCAs are, typically,
building-centered, and provide a wide range of support services and programs
open to all women, the YWCA is a natural location for programs for battered
women and their children.
Drawing together police, hospital personnel, divorce lawyers, clergy, mental
health associations, and other key comunity agency representatives, the YWCA
decides, with their cooperation, how to survey their comunity to assess the
need, find out what services are available and what are lacking, what resources
can be tapped and how they can be focused on the problem. The components of a
package are then put together: a continuing effort to educate the comunity,
PAGENO="0277"
271
a crisis line, staffed 24 hours a day and not connected with a shelter, but
open to police and hospitals and well publicized throughout the comunity.
Very often the number will be posted in high schools, to enable an older
child to call for a mother who cannot safely call herself. Other services:
a shelter or other arrangements for temporary housing such as comunity safe
houses, medical care, and counselingor psychological care, are designed to
help a woman reach the place where she can make her own decisions about her
future. Since a YWCA, being a women's organization, already has in place
services for women, such as child care, job training and placement programs,~
counseling and support groups, which are necessary components of service to
victims of domestic violence, It is an ideal place for programs for battered
women. Staff and volunteer personnel provide advocacy at welfare departments
or in legal situations, and assistance in securing alternate housing and
whatever further professional counseling may be needed. In Takoma, Washing-
ton, our YWCA has a large center that serves 700 women and 800 children
per year. Their emphasis on prevention is very strong: no corporal punish-
ment is allowed at the center, and the women are taught that violence is
passed from one generation to the next. Alternative methods of raising
children without violence are explored in the center.
In the preparation of this testimony, I have consulted with the directors
of six of our programs we know to be excellent: Tacoma, Washington; Cin-
cinnati, Ohio; Cortland, New York; Salt Lake City, Utah; Wilmington, Delaware;
and South Bend, Indiana. Steady, regular funding, regardless of the popularity
of the programs at a given time, is a universal need. CETA workers, hired for
one year, and required to look for other work throughout their employment
period, cannot give their full attention to the job at hand. Local money
is often seed money, and the United Way may or may not accept domestic
violence programs for continuing funds. The Directors of our programs are
constantly seekinga-stabie source of funds. This legislation, whichre-
quests $15 million for FY1980, is modest indeed to deal with such a need.
The directors of our programs expressed their strong conviction that YWCAs
or other community-based voluntary women's organizations are the best location
for battered women's programs because they accept all women, without dis-
tinction. Welfare or other public agencies deal with poor women, and lawyers
and doctors with the affluent, but the YWCA accepts and helps women from
every economic, social, and racial background. It is important that staff
and volunteers identify with battered women against "the system" which
typically sees them as wholly or partly to blame for their predicament,
and which thus is not turned to with trust in time of need. Since YWCAs
are for all women, battered women do not feel themselves isolated or shamed
by their need.
One center director expressed her wish that military authorities could know
how they contribute to the problem. Twenty to 25% of this center's clients
come from a nearby military base. They are isolated from relatives, the
base services are for men only, and to qualify for outside help, a wife
must have her husband's signature.
While acknowledging the need for continuing research, all directors felt that
the federal money should go to service providers. They believed that universities
and private research organizations can and will fill the need f9r increased
understanding of the problem.
Helen R. Parolla, Director
Public Policy Center
National Board, YWCA 7/24/79
PAGENO="0278"
PRESIDENT
Shirley I. Leviton
Hewlett Harbor, N.Y.
VICE PRESIDENT
Shirley Joseph
Vlilliamsville, N.Y.
VICE PRESIDENT
Barbara lardel
Shaker Heights, Dials
VICE PRESIDENT
Ilere E!arsky
Los Angeles, Calif.
VICE PRESIDENT
Mildred Schwartz
Memphis, Tern.
VICE PRESIDENT
Elaine Sterling
West Erange, N.J.
RECORDINS SECRETARY
Nar Wood
West Grange, N.J.
ASST. RECORDING
SECRETARY
Claire Wolf
Chicago, Ill.
TREASURER
Horterse Tanner
Weodmere. N.Y.
ASS'T. TREASURER
Perry Levier
Rec!uville Centre. N.Y.
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Marjorie Merlin Cohen
ISRAEL OFFICE
NCJW Research Institute
School ot Education
Hebreus Unaversily-
Mount Scepus
Jerusalem. Israel
NCJW Sftice: ee2-2DR
lnsfitulz Otfice: 862-018
WASHINGTON OFFICE
Suife 924
1346 Connecticut Uue.. N.W.
Washington, DC. 20036
252-2RR-D5ea
TELEX: 426540 NCJW
iF JEWSH `NOMEN
YORK. N.Y. 10010
272
TESTIMONY BEFORE SUDCOI'NITTEE Ott SELECT EDUCIuTIODI
OF lOUSE COIT0ITTEE Ott ED0ICATION H.P. 2977.
CDOIYESTIC VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND SERVICES ACT
July 10, 1079
The t~stional Coouncil of Jewish Wonton is a non-profit voluntary organiza-
tion composed of 160 Sections nvrtionsoiele, with 100,000 ertetnhers.
Individecal Sections function as social advocacy groups, both on t'neir
oven and through Coalitions, to improve the welfare of individuals iou
their conmueeities who hAve traditionally hand difficulty reprementing
themselves. Because of our long and extensive experience in social
advocacy and working in communities to improve the seelfare of indi-
viduals, see had hoped that this testimogetn could have been given, in
person, by one of our community leaders. We are grateful for the
opportunity to submit our support of this legislation in writing.
Since its inception in 1893 ttCJtt has concerned itself with the
strengthening of family life. The organization has become increasingly
aware thorough its services for women and children of the growing in-
cidence of Domestic Violence and the need for federal support of
solutions to this problem. At our recent National Convention the follow-
ing resolution was passed:
HEALTH ARIt tlUttAtt SERVICES
The National Council of Jewish t'Iomen believes that a healthy community,
sound family life and individual tech-being are interdependent. It
believes, therefore, that our democratic society must give priority
to programs which meet human needs. Thee public and private sectors
must cooperate to achieve this end.
PAGENO="0279"
273
We Therefore Resolve:
"To work to eliminate Dosestic Violence, which includes Child Abuse
and Neglect and Spouse Abuse through:
a. Education and early detection
b. A system of supportive and protective social services."
In keeping with our resolutions we support H.R. 2977 because we feel that this bill
begins to take some important steps towards solutions to the complex problems of
Domestic Violence. The National Council of Jewish Women is already involved with
providing assistance to victims of Domestic Violence and their dependents in New
Jersey, New York, Missouri, Massachusetts, and Texas. In other areas throughout
the country our Sections are providing their communities with an, awareness of the
problem through public education programs. We also have Sections providing informa-
tion and referral services which include assistance to Victims of Domestic Violence.
To cite specific examples, in New Jersey we have three Sections involved in Domestic
Violence projects, each approaching the problem somewhat differently. The Hid-Bergen
County, New Jersey, Section has worked with a coalition of community groups over the
past 2 years and has developed a program sponsored by the Bergen County Community
Action Program called Alternatives to Domestic Violence. This is a comprehensive
multi-service agency, with its primary goal to reduce and eliminate the occurrence
of violence in the home. Services are available to abused as well as abusive adults
and their families. Services provided include
2W hour hotline services
individual, marital, family and group counselling for
women, men, their children and young adults
advocacy counselling including housing, financial
assistance, job training and related services
2W hour staffed emergency shelter for women and their children
up to one month
legal consultation, assistance and referral
child care
* transportation
The staff is comprised of professional and paraprofessional counsellors specifically
trained to work with clients in crisis who have been abused and/or abusers, and
PAGENO="0280"
274
children who have been exposed to violence. A legal consultant provides direct
service to clients and supervises paralegal counsellors.
The Essex County Mew Jersey Section, in conjunction with other organizations
established a Task Force on Battered Women. The Task Force has been acting in an
advocacy role working politically on the state and county level. They have recently
obtained ample funds to open a shelter for battered women and their children. The
women, so far, who have used the shelter are from Newark, New Jersey, an inner
city area, and its surrounding suburbs. It seems that the majority of the women
come from the suburhan areas rather than the inner city. Their findings so far,
which are somewhat limited, adhere to the findings of established research that
Domestic Violence cuts across all socio-economic classes, racial and religious groups.
In Greater Westfield, N.J., our Section has developed a Battered Wives Speaker's
Bureau, specifically to inform communities about the problems and provide practical
information.
Project Daybreak in Worcester, Massachusetts, is a 2~ hour shelter program where
NCJW volunteers provide counselling, resource help, legal assistance, and hotline
services. The program has been in existence for over a year and has serviced over
1100 women and children.
The Shelter program in particular has seen 103 women and 152 children in the past
year. The age ranges of the women go from 17-50 years and older. The women are
both married and single, and socio-economic breakdowns seem to show
L~O% -- lower class-lower middle class
30% -- middle class-upper middle class
30% -- upper class
These limited findings as mentioned above, again adhere to the data of established
research. The project is staffed by 68 trained volunteers, and 10 paid staff members.
PAGENO="0281"
275
%Thile we support this proposed legislation, we have the following concerns:
I. In Section 3K, under Grants Authorized, the bill states that it is essential
that assurances be provided for the use of personnel with appropriate skills to
deal with this problem. On page 19, the bill talks about the use of Vista Volun-
teers. We urge that ample funds be provided for the use of professionally trained
staff to deal with victims of Domestic Violence.
The National Council of Jewish Women as a voluntary organization, has a long and
respected reputation for developing community service programs. Volunteer leaders
of local projects participate in the hiring of administrative and clinical pro-
fessionals to coordinate and supervise these programs. NCJW volunteers are trained
by professionals and work in partnership to provide necessary services needed by
these programs. We stress, from our experience, that volunteers working in programs
such as these, must be under the supervision of professionally trained personnel.
II. We advocate that comprehensive services are needed for the victims of Domestic
Violence and their dependents and we are led to believe that the bill encompasses
this underlying philosophy. We recommend that federal support projects move in the
direction of looking at the entire family -- victims, abusers and the effects of
violence on children, in order to determine the root causes of violence occurring
within families.
III. Pc have some concerns about the amount of funding being suggested. From our
experience we have learned that the cost of funding a shelter program is at minimum
$200,000-300,000 per year depending upon the geographic location, cost of upkeep,
amount of professional staff salaries, etc. These programs only provide space for,
on the average, 30 women and children (15 and 15) at a time. Within these con-
straints, how many women and children can actually be served under the suggested
funding? We would recommend here that in line with the above information, suggested
PAGENO="0282"
276
authorizations be thought through in terms of the level of service needed to
effectively assist victims.
The bill further states that special emphasis will be given to the support of
community based projects of demonstrated effectiveness, particularly those operating
shelters. While we support this, we would hope that the establishment of addi-
tional services be encouraged and funded.
IV. The description of the geographic distribution of funds seens unclear. Will
the distribution of funds be determined by existi'ng prograns within each state or
allocated equally? We would strongly suggest that determinations be made by current
needs and wherever possible projected ones as well.
In summary, the National Council of Jewish Women supports H.R. 2977. We stress the
importance of developing and delivering comprehensive services with the focus on
the family in order to determine root causes of this problem and develop solutions,
with the concerns mentioned above.
PAGENO="0283"
277
B1udBi41h1%~men
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC AFF.
HARRIET STONEHILL
B'NAI B'RITH WOMEN
1640 Rhode Island Ave.
N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036
B'nai B'rith Women, a Jewish women's service organization,
with a national membership of 150,000 strongly supports legislation
on the issue of domestic violence. Our membership, which includes
women from 18-85 years of age, living in urban, suburban and rural
environments across this nation, recognizes the problem of domestic
violence and the inherent individual and familial destruction it
commands.
The Judaic philosophy affirms the sanctity of the individual
and affirms the respect f~r individuals by laws which offer pro-
tection to those being victimized. Mutual respect for man and for
woman is a basic tenet of the Jewish faith. This philosophy of
respect and reverence for the individual, be it youth, man, woman
or aged person, demands an atmosp~era' free of violence in order
to exist. It is with basic Judaic philosophy as our heritage and
guiding principle, that we publicly testify as to the need for
legislation in the area of domestic violence.
In preparing this testimony we have investigated the inter-
relationship of persons involved in domestic violence, and have
concluded that solutions to the horrendous problems which we reco~-
nized, must be approached concurrently from several directions.
Policy underlying any legislation nust exhibit concern for
primary prevention, offer emergency and long-term services, and
provide meaningful judicial protection and enforcement. Multi-
1640 Rhode Island Avenue, NW/Washington, DC 20036/(202)857-6600
PAGENO="0284"
278
level solutions must be offered. Not to do so is to condone
violence as the national node of legitimate American policy.
And not to do so now is to truly encourage violence as the
inheritance for future generations. Who is not aware that
domestic violence is a generational problem? An abused child
grows into an offender adult to his/her nate. An abused nate
often becomes an abusing parent. How do we break this terrible
generational problem of domestic violence? It affects all ages
and creates problems which spill over into such areas as child
abuse, aged abuse, drug and alcohol abuse. Domestic violence
is not an internal "spat" between two persons; it is violence
erupting within the domestic setting and threatening all contem-
porary society itself. This ongoing and expanding cycle of vio-
lence needs to be broken, and needs to be broken now.
The immediate focus must be to create new laws, to change
existing laws, to legally define acts of violence and to treat
the victims of offenders through just and humane laws. Those who
uphold the law, police, prosecutors, judges must be trained to
acknowledge domestic violence as crimes in judicial terms, not
as internal family situations.
Orders of Protections must be a right of every victim and
provision for adequate physical protection must be established.
The painful cycle insured by domestic violence can be broken
by providing treatment for the~ beaten victim. The victim, who
often has a "self-blame" image, must be able to change the depen-
dent relationship, be it legal, financial and/or emotional, by
PAGENO="0285"
279
having new options, new skills and new strengths offered to her
or hin through counseling and training. Counseling must be pro-
vided to the offender so that mutually respected roles are pro-
vided. Positive self-concepts must be offered to both. Personal
growth through counseling, training and teaching must be provided
by community-based programs.
Statistics state 1.8 million annual beatings occur, 16% of
families engage in violence, 37% of divorce cases have violence
listed, 85% of homicides followed earlier violence, with 50% having
five or more previous violent episodes. Is this the American
ethic of family life? Today we are confronted with severe stress.
Studies have shown that the stress of unemployment, the stress of
unstable marraiges, the stress of our economy, all contribute to
domestic violence. Society cannot remove all current stress; dom-
estic violence will not automatically disappear. A program, both
judicial and supportive must therefore be provided immediately.
B'nai B'rith Women recognizes the true value of a family in
its various structures, as an emotional supportive unit. However,
it also recognizes that if there is an abuser to a spouse, a mate,
a child, an adolescent or an older parent it no longer is a family,
and legal and supportive protection must be given to the victims.
The religious precepts as well as the American ethics, re-
garding respect of the individual and the sanctity of the human
body can thus be maintained. We sincerely urge each legi~lator to
support this important legislation which honestly confronts and
effectively deals with this basic problem of family crime.
L~9-9jL~ 0 - 79 - 19
PAGENO="0286"
280
TESTIMONY TO BE SUBMITTED AS PART OF
COMMITTEE HEARINGS ON HB 2977,
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PREVENTION AND
SERVICES ACT
Submitted by members of DASH, Inc., a group of citizens in a thirteen-
county area of eastern Kentucky.
The members of DASH recognize a crying need for assistance to victims
of domestic violence in our area. Southeastern Kentucky is an isolated,
rural area in the midst of the Appalachian coalfields. The region is
marked by contrasts; there are both rich and poor people, spectacular beauty.
and depressing ugliness, a rugged simplicity of live and a complicated
political structure. Family violence is pervasive, yet there is no service
structure organized to deal with it. Attempts thus far have been sporadic
and, for the most part, ineffective. Agencies, government and citizens have
yet to recognize and deal with the situation openly and effectively.
Statistics from our area of eastern Kentucky have been gathered on an
ad hoc basis.* They conform with statistics gathered in other nfral areas,
however, and we believe them to be a valuable index to the extent of the
problem. Thirty-three percent to fifty percent of the divorce clients in
the various legal services offices in the eastern part of the state describe
"beatings" as a reason for their seeking a divorce. From the criminal justice
angle, the number of women who have obtained warrants against their husbands
in one county in a ten-month period was estimated by the District Judge of that
county as 52. In order to get a true reflection of the amount of violence bet-
ween spouses, however, it is necessary to look at the number of such crimes
which are unreported. Wife abuse is regarded by most law enforcement officials
as the most unreported crime next to incest. It is more unreported than rape,
which according to the FBI, in not reported nine out of ten times. A more
accurate, yet conservative, assessment of the number of violent attacks during
the same period is, therefore, over 500.
Other statistics for a rural area were gathered by examining the divorce
records in the Hazard, Kentucky, office of Appalachian Research and Defense Fund.
The office serves Perry, Knott, Letcher, Leslie, Lee, Breathitt, Wolfe and Owsley
Counties, but located as it is in Hazard, the majority of divorce clients live
in Perry County. Under present Kentucky law no grounds for a divorce need be
proved, only a finding that the marriage has suffered an irretrievable break-
down is necessary. Therefore, attorneys are unawarë*of the motives of many
of their clients in seeking a divorce. However, of those women who do offer a
*Recently the Kentucky Commission on Women released the results of a Lou
Harris poll taken on domestic violence in Kentucky. We have not yet had the
opportunity to see the report, but we do know that it substantiates the conten-
tions we are presenting in this testimony.
PAGENO="0287"
281
reason, over 33 percent specified "beatings." Since many women are reluctant
to talk about their husbanda' abuse, the actual percentage is probably consider-
ably higher.
The other local office of the Appalachian Research and Defense Fund
in the project service area located in Prestonsburg, Kentucky, confirms
the findings that physical abuse is the reason given in approximately one-
half of the divorce cases in the area. One staff attorney, who handled
approximately 45 divorce cases in a one-year period, stated that at least half
of the clients she represented in divorce proceedings had been abused by a
spouse.
The Police Department of the City of Prestonsburg estimates that they
receive approximately 150 to 200 calls per year regarding domestic violence.
(The population of the City of Prestonsburg is approximately 3,500.) The
Floyd County Police estimate that 20% of all calls for police assistance
involve intra-family disputes.
A count was made of all the warrants issued in Perry County in 1977
for a violation of any of the provisions of Chapter 508 of the Kentucky
Penal Code which is entitled "Assaults and Related Offenses." Also counted was
the number of warrants issued for "Drunk and Disorderly Conduct" since warrants
are often written for this offense in a domestic violence situation. The
number of warrants for each of these crimes which was issued against a male
upon the complaint of a female was then counted.
Complaints by females against males accounted for 154 of a total of
285, or 52.2 percent of all chatges of the above. offenses.
Money to fund a shelter and services has, as yet, been unavailable
to DASH, although we have worked hard to get funding. It is imperative that
we -locate a source of funding that will allow us to begin a system of services
for women and children in our area. -
Current solutions to the problem, particularly in Eastern Kentucky, are
few. Presently existing temedies, both civil and criminal, are inadequate
for a number of reasons. Although the assault statutes in the criminal law
contain no limitations that would prevent a woman from seeking charges against
her husband, their application effectively precludes action in the majority of
cases of domestic violence. Many complaintants are well acquainted with their
assailants and are intimidated into withdrawing complaints. Another reason
complaining witnesses withdraw complaints is that they are seeking protection.
When they learn thatnot only do they have to return to court endlessly, but
that they are vulnerable to attack and threat by the very person they are
trying to scare off by prosecution, they give up. Still others do not file
complaints because they are fearful of these same results. At present the
bail system is not used in such a way that a victim will receive protection if
his or her assailant is released on bail. A futher barrier In the use of the
criminal justice system is police reluctance to interfere in domestic
violence situations.
PAGENO="0288"
282
Existing civil remedies for domestic violence in Kentucky include an
action for dissolution of marriage under K.R.S. Chapter 403, an action under
existing child abuse statutes, or an action under Kentucky's new Protection
of Adult Act, K.R.S. 209. A problem with the dissolution action is that the
court will only have jurisdiction once a petition for divorce or annulment
is filed. This means that often a victim will be forced to file for dis-
solution of his/her marriage before he/she can get help. Then, once
a restraining order is obtained, there remains the question of what to do with
it. Under existing law, the only means of enforcing such an order is through
a complex and time-consuming contempt proceeding.
Child abuse statutes are geared toward protecting children rather than
adults and so are of little value to the adult victim of domestic violence.
The new Protection of Adults Act was designed to in some ways fill this gap,
but it is inadequate for the purpose of many victims of domestic violence in
that it involves a determination that the victim is incapable of acting on
his of her own behalf, and relies entirely on the department of Human Resources
for its enforceaent. Aüother real problem with the Protection of Adults Act
is that the remedy is the same as the inadequate remedy offered by the divorce
statutes.
What can a woman do under these circumstances? Shockingly, the answer
is, very little. Nationwide, the response of police to calls for help from
battered women is notoriously bad. In rural areas such as eastern Kentucky, this
problem is exacerbated by the long distances and impassable roads that separate
many women from local law enforcement personnel, by the lack of telephones,
and by the fact that many rural women do not drive.
If the police do come, many times they are of no help. Often they
give the woman erroneous legal advice about her rights. At most, and only
rarely, they will take her to the hospital or to some other place of safety.
I The abusing spouse is almost never arrested.
More problems for the battered woman begin the moment she walks out the
door of her home. Her first and most urgent need is somewhere to go. Without
such a place, economic reality forces her to return to her abusive husband.
Women who are abused sometimes stay with relatives or infrequently with friends.
Relatives are often unwilling to take the abused women in because they view
this action as interfering in a private matter between man and woman. Admittedly,
factors other than lack of alternative housing enter into a woman's decision
to stay in a violent home. These factors include her concern for her children,
the belief that "this time he'll change," love for her husband, fear of
retaliation, and low self-esteem brought on by years of being treated as a
punching bag. However, the most significant reason is that in most instances,
the wife is trapped: she has absolutely no choice but to stay. This is borne
out, we believe, by the vast number of women who have stayed, or asked to stay,
at the few shelters now available. There is a critical need for one or more
shelters in Eastern Kentucky now.
No facilities exist in Eastern Kentucky that can accommodate women and
their children; they are urgently needed. Terrified women and their children
have spent entire days in legal and social service offices while frantic phone
PAGENO="0289"
283
calls seeking shelter turn up nothing. Emergency housing for battered women
and their children does not exist in Eastern Kentucky, nor does it exist in
Kentucky as a whole in near the number of units necessary.
Some of the greatest problems for the victims of domestic violence in
Eastern Kentucky are the lack of alternative housing, the lack of job oppor-
tunities and the geographical isolation. Victims are isolated from one another
and from services that might offer assistance. Transportation and communication
are key problems that need to be addressed in order to begin to touch the
problem of domestic abuse in this area.
The public's awareness of, and attitude toward domestic violence must
be changed if any longlasting results are to be realized regarding this serious
social problem. Beyond that, viable alternatives for victims must be created if
they are to be able to choose to leave an unalterable situation. Only a compre-
hensive network of services offering shelter, legal advice, employment services,
financial advice, re-education, counseling, and hope can begin to address the
problems faced by victims of domestic violence.
All the above demonstrate the acute need for funding for shelters and
other services for victims of domestic violence in this country. Erin Pizzey,
the foundress of the Chiswick Women's Aid, the first group in England and,
in fact, in the world, to deal with the problem, toured the United States this
~pring, giving workshops on domestic violence. At one of her lectures Ms. Pizzey
spoke for all of us: "I have seen a nunber of battered women's shelters in the
U.S. close down in the last few years due to lack of funding. If something key
doesn't happen in government spending and legislation in the next 2 years, I
fear the. issue of battered women will all go under the carpet again. And that
would be a tragedy." Ms. Pizzey's warning is grounded in the fact that in 1977,
all government aid to CWA was cancelled, forcing them to become totally self-
supporting. Ms. Pizzey concluded with the following claim: "Until all govern-
ment recognize the necessity of rescuing families from violence, we will never
live in peace."
PAGENO="0290"
284
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee:
I am Ellen Pence, the State Director of Minnesota Programs for
Battered Women. I am here today to testify on H. R. 2977 regarding
the allocation of federal funds for domestic violence programs. In
the 1977-78 session the Minnesota State Legislature passed legislation
very similar in purpose to this bill. The Minnesota legislation,
allocating $625,000, had four major provisions. The legislation al-
located monies to fund four or more shelters in both urban and rural
areas in the state. It provided for the establishment of an 18-
member Advisory Task Force of professionals and people with grassroots
experience in working with battered women. Further, it required all
social service, law enforcement, and medical personnel to report
incidents of battering to the administrating state agency for the
purpose of determining the need for continued and/or expanded state
funding. And finally, it provided funds to conduct a statewide edu-
cational program on issues related to battering for both professionals
and the public.
The Minnesota legislation exemplifies, on a state level, the
potential effectiveness of federal legislation such as H. R. 2977.
Prior to the passage of the 1977 Legislation, there were only two
shelters for battered women in the state. Both were located in the
St. Paul/Minneapolis area. However, as a result of the state funding
there are currently seven shelters in operation. Moreover, with the
substantial increase in the state's commitment (to $3-million in
1980-81) an additional nine shelters will open by December of this
year.
State funding has provided many grassroots volunteer groups with
the legitimacy necessary to solicit and receive local financial support
in towns across the state. Several communities, Rochester, Hopkins,
Burnsville, Minneapolis, and St. Cloud for example, have all committed
community development block grant funds to provide facilities to serve
as shelters. Other communities have committed rural development funds,
CETA funds, general assitance funds, mental health funds, and Title
XX monies. Private foundations, citizen groups, and United Way agencies
have all joined in the effort to keep locally established shelters
operating. State funds represent only from one-fourth to one-half of
a shelter's operating budget in Minnesota, depending on the shelter
size and location; thus, financial support from the local community is
essential. Undoubtedly in Minnesota, state funds have generated more
than twice their amount in local financial commitment to a problem
once considered a private matter and an inapproporiate arena for com-
munity involvement.
While shelters neither solve the problem of battering nor guaran-
tee the protection of all victims of partner assault they are symbols
in a community of the right of all people to be physically protected by
the society in which they live. They are a constant reminder to the
judicial, medical and social service system of the need for change in
their policies and attitudes toward the victims of one of this society's
most devastating and archaic practices--wife-beating.
With few exceptions, the state funding is granted only to locally-
based grassroots organizations for three reasons. First, grassroots
organizations can provide housing and advocacy for women and children
at a much lower cost than traditional agencies. Second, a grassroots
*approach maximizes the use of existing social service agencies which
prevents the duplication of services. Finally, this approach encourages
participation by former victims, thereby maintaining a perspective that
does not blame the victim for the abuse he or she has experienced.
PAGENO="0291"
285
Currently, there are over 40 grassroots organizations in the state
of Minnesota which provide individual and class advocacy for women and
children, educate communities on issues related to battering, and house,
either in secured facilites such as shelters or in safe homes, victims
of partner assault.
By limiting their roles to providing housing and advocacy for
women and children within the system, we have successfully avoided the
development Of an alternative social service system. Furthermore,
we are attempting to develop permanent changes in the existing social
service system to effectively work with all victims of family violence,
not just those referred through shelters.
In the past two years, a class advocacy approach in Minnesota has
resulted in significant changes: hospitals throughout the state have
developed specialized protocols in emergency rooms for victims of
physical assault within families; police and sheriff departments to-
gether with shelters have sponsored specialized training in handling
domestic calls; and, counselors and therapists have worked with shelter
staffs andresidents to develop new methods to counsel both the victims
and assailants.
Gradually, the prevailing attitude that the victim in some way
facilitates the batterer's violent behavior or is merely a participant
in the so-called dysfunctional family is changing. Major legislation
has been passed providing the police and courts with more effective
tools to utilize when cases involve family violence. As a result of
these efforts to build within the present system an awareness of how
policy and practice can perpetuate family violence, professionals and
the community-at-large are developing the skills to work effectively
with individuals and victims toward ultimate elimination of such vio-
lence.
A provision in the Minnesota legislation, similar to this proposed
legislation, provided for the creation of a statewide task force to
assure citizen participation in the implementation of the legislation.
The state administering agency, the Department of Corrections (with
two full-time positions in the Battered Women's Program), has been
provided with the expertise necessary to implement this legislation by
the 18-member task force established in Minnesota. The task force
membership represents various and diverse backgrounds: fifty percent
of the task force members are from rural areas; one-third of the members
represents minority communities; over one-third have personally ex-
perienced violence in their families. Fifty percent of the task force
members belong to non-profit advocacy or shelter organizations. While
the proposed federal legislation does require states to "set forth
procedures to assure active citizen participation within the state" it
does not require the involvement of former victims or people of diverse
economic and cultural backgrounds. Based on our experience in working
with a task force, both of these requirements should be high priority
considerations in the legislation. Further, their participation is
crucial in the creation of any federal inter-agency council.
Such an inter-agency council, as defined in Section 10 of H. R.. 2977,
can be extremely beneficial to organizations throughout the country in
their efforts to effect changes in federal policies. For example, the
`existence of such a council and the national clearinghouse could have
greatly facilitated the effort of local housing authorities, shelters
and organizations across the country to make changes in the community
development block grant guidelines necessary to allow the use of community
development funds for the purchase and rehabilitation of buildings
for shelters. Current efforts to make changes in Secion 8 guidelines,
PAGENO="0292"
286
Title XX funding, and Action guidelines could also benefit from such
a council.
With respect to the provisions regarding the allocation of funds,
I have several comments. I believe that some changes could be useful
in Section 3 which states that grants cannot be made in excess of 25
percent of a program's annual budget unless the program has been in
existence for less than one year. In our experience in Minnesota, and
I believe the same is true for Pennsylvania, we have found that shelters
or advocacy programs take a full year of operation before the community
recognizes the legitimacy of the programs and begins to accept some
financial responsibility for them, especially in rural areas. We would
suggest that during the first two years of funding through this legis-
lation, organizations be eligible to apply for up to fifty percent of
their annual budgets.
It is our assumption that the intent of the statement in this sec-
tion, "that a grant awarded to an entity which has not been in operation
for more than one year may equal up to fifty percent", page 9, lines 3
and 4, is in reference not to the existence of the non-profit corporation
but to the date that the actual program for which finding is sought be-
came operational. Perhaps clarification of the meaning of this is nec-
essary.
In Section 3, page 6, lines 3 through 5, we are pleased to see that
the proposed legislation allows the chief executive of the state to
specify which state agency he or she will choose to administer the
state domestic violence -program under this act. As you know, several
states have passed legislation and have already developed state programs.
Each of these states have in their legislation designated administering
state agencies, and federal legislation which would have required funding
to be administered through a particular state agency would have created
confusion, duplication of efforts, and could potentially be disruptive
to established state pro~rams. We support this provision remaining un-
altered in the proposed legislation regardless of the vehicle H. E. W.
chooses to use for allocating monies to the state.
Finally, while this legislation provides much of the incentive to
state and local communities to take the responsibility, it is only the
beginning of funding needed to effectively work toward the tremendous
changes that must occur in this nation. Its emphasis on community-
based programming, on state invlovement, on citizen participation, on
-not creating programs which are not totally dependent on federal funding,
are all excellent features of this legislation.
Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee, I would like to
thank you for this opportunity to testify today and more importantly,
thank you for your efforts to confront what for all of us is a per-
sonally difficult issue with which to deal through legislation.
PAGENO="0293"
287
MINNESOTA DATA COLLECTiON ON BATTERED WOMEN:
SYSTEM DESIGN AND DATA ANALYSIS
This is an excerpt of the Report to the Legislature
on Programs and Services for Battered Women.
Programs and Services for Battered Women
Department of Corrections
430 Metro Square Building
St.Paul,MN 55101
612-296-1345
January, 1979
PAGENO="0294"
288
DATA: SYSTEM DESIGN AND DATA ANALYSIS
Introdyction
Data regarding assaults on partners is collected by Minnesota's Department of
Corrections. This information is useful in making policy decisions regarding the
continuation of statewide programs and services for battered women. Minnesota's data
collection system provides information regarding the state's population of battered
women, identifies patterns of service usage and referrals, and adds to our current
knowledge of violence between partners.
As a method of obtaining this information, Minnesota Statutes require all hospitals,
physicians, public health nurses, law enforcement agencies, social workers and commu-
nity health workers to report assaults on women by male relatives, husbands or men
with whom they are living or with whom they have lived in the past. Staff members
from shelters housing battered women and their children submit descriptive information
about the women and their assailants. Women housed in shelters also answer questions
about their children and services provided to them while at the shelter.
Methodology
The Department of Corrections designed a system for the collection of data docu-
menting "incidents of assaults on women" (Chapter 428, Laws of Minnesota, 1977). To
accomplish this, the Department of Corrections:
I. Used the statutory definition of assault as an act with intent to cause fear in
another or immediate bodily harm or death; or intentionally inflicting or
attempting to inflict bodily harm upon another. Instructions to reporters state
that "agencies are required to collect data on women who have been assaulted
and/or threatened with assault".
2. Designed data collection forms for each type of reporting agency (see attach-
ments). A number of factors are common to all reporting forms; the woman's
identity is not revealed on the forms so all information is anonymous and forms
are no longer than one page. Information includes, but is not limited to: date of
occurrence, location, frequency and characteristics of partner abuse such as the
victim's age, number of children, race and legal status of-relationship with her
assailant. Forms were reviewed by various groups and pre-tested before final
printing and distribution. -
3. Distributed forms for medical and law enforcement agencies in January of 1978
to approximately 6,000 practicing physicians, l86 hospitals, 74 public health
agencies and 286 sheriffs and police departments. The Department of
Corrections began to receive reports on March I from these agencies. Human
service providers received copies of their reporting form in May and June. These
agencies began to submit reports as of July 1. Human service providers submit
forms on abused males and abused females.
In addition, forms containing information on each woman housed in a shelter are
submitted to the Department of Corrections quarterly. Three operating shelters
began to provide information on January I, 1978. The other four shelters have
submitted forms commencing with their date of opening (all after July I).
PAGENO="0295"
289
4. Established a system to review forms upon receipt for completeness, to keypunch
the information and file the original form. Results are summarized and
distributed semi-annually.
Results
Data summarized in this section were submitted by law enforcement, medical and
human service providers. Only information from reports dated before November 15 is
included in these results. Unless otherwise stated, statistics here are a composite from
law enforcement, medical and human service providers. Some questions are asked of
only one profession; summaries of these responses are clearly identified.
Some information on women housed in shelters is also summarized here. To avoid
duplication of results, responses from women housed in shelters are included only when
the information is not provided by law, medical and human service personnel.
Data collection forms have been submitted by service providers in many counties of the
state yet only about 65% of the required reporting agencies have filed any reports with
the Department of Corrections. Although 4,259 forms have been submitted by
November 15, it is unlikely that this figure reflects the true extent of the problem for
two reasons: It is difficult to determine the number of people assaulted by their
partners who never reported to law enforcement, medical and human service personnel
and, secondly, it is difficult to determine how many professionals failed to report all
incidents of partner abuse with which they had contact.
Underreporting is evident in many cases where large law enforcement groups, hospitals
or social service offices submit only one or two forms when it is reasonable to infer
they would have dealt with many more battered partners. For example:
The Minneapolis Police Department reported 35 incidents of assaults on women
from March I to September 16. This apparent underreporting was reduced after
discussing their reporting rate with the Mayor and the Chief -of Police. As a
result of this discussion, 626 reports were submitted from police logs from March
I to November 15. Seventeen reports were duplicates of the original 35. This
indicates that no more than 5.7% of the incidents seen by Minneapolis police
were submitted prior to the meeting.
St. Paul is approximately 75% the population of Minneapolis. If St. Paul police
reported at the same rate as Minneapolis police, an estimated 470 reports could
be expected from St. Paul police instead of.the 192 reports actually received by
the Department of Corrections for the same period. -
Officials from many counties, Douglas, Pipestone, and Big Stone for example, did
not report any incidents of partner abuse, yet women from some of these
counties were housed in shelters in the past year.
Due to underreporting and non-reporting, it is conservatively estimated that the
Department of Corrections received reports on only two of three women seen by law
enforcement, medical and human service providers in the past year.
Mandatory data collection systems are generally poor methods of obtaining information
on a specific population. To insure relatively high compliance with the mandate, it is
necessary to regularly contact and assist agencies required to submit reports. The
Department of Corrections had neither the personnel nor the monetary resources to
PAGENO="0296"
290
work closely with the approximately 8,000 agencies required to submit information on
battered partners. For these reasons, special samples of law enforcement and medical
personnel were chosen from the total population of reporters. Professionals in these
special samples were contacted occasionally by Department of Corrections personnel
who encouraged them to submit their reports and provided any necessary assistance.
The purpose of this extra effort was to determine if the number of reports from special
sample agencies would be proportionately greater than the rest of the population.
Incidence of Partner Abuse
The Department of Corrections instructs medical and law enforcement personnel to
submit a form when seeing a woman who has been assaulted or threatened with assault.
Human service providers are instructed to fill out a form for each incident of assault or
threat of assault on all adults. However, few human service providers submit forms for
each assault their client experiences. Most human service providers submit one form
per client and state on the form the abuse is "ongoing".
For the reporting period from March I to November 15, 4,259 incidents of spouse abuse
have been reported to the Department of Corrections. Comparing information from
law, medical and human service forms on age, zip code, date, time of incident and
relationship to assailant, 105 forms were labeled probable duplicates and 37 were
possible duplicates. The number of duplicates have been removed from estimates of
number of incidents but descriptive information from these forms remains in summaries
of responses about the victims. Human service providers filed reports on 53 males and
950 females who were assaulted by their partners. lnformatibn on battered males is
summarized in the section entitled Programs and Services for Battered Men.
Incidence and Location of Battering
The number of battering incidents reported by law enforcement and medical personr~el
from March I to November 15 are summarized in Table I. Human service providers
began to report on July I, reflecting a 4l~ month period to November 15. The number of
probable and possible duplicate forms is removed from the figures in Column 2.
Based on Column 2 figures, the number of reports the Department of Corrections would
receive annually is estimated in Column 3. With the reporting agencies not provided
any special assistance, an estimated 6,914 incidents of partner abuse would be recorded
for 1978.
TABLE I
Reported and Estimated Incidents of Women Battering in the State of Minnesota
Reports with Projected Annual
Total Reported Duplicates Removed Reported Incidents
Law Enforcement
3/1/78 - 11/15/78
Medical
3/1/78 - Ill 15/78
Human Service
7/1/78 - 11/15/78
TOTAL
1,750 1,690 2,386
1,505 1,437 2,029
951 937 2,499
4,206 4,064 6,914
PAGENO="0297"
291
As stated previously, an estimated 2 of 3 battering cases seen by professionals were
reported to the Department of Corrections. If reports had been submitted on the other
third of the cases, an estimated 10,371 reports on incidents of abuse on women would be
received annually.
According to the number of reports received from law enforcement agencies in the
special sample, the incidence of partner abuse was much greater than reported by all
reporting agencies considered together. Thirty of 289 law enforcement agencies
comprised the randomly selected special sample that were contacted concerning the
police reporting forms. Law enforcement agencies in the special sample represent
17.5% of the state's population. Results of this sample, summarized in Table 2, indicate
that a moderate amount of contact and follow up with reporting agencies increased
projected annual reported incidents by over 50%. From the number of responses
received from the special sample, an estimated 5,39 I cases of abused women were seen
by law enforcement officials alone.
TABLE 2
Reported and Estimated Number of Incidents of Women Abuse
from Law Enforcement Special Sample
Number of Special Sample Responses Received 676
Percent of Total Population Represented by Special Sample 17.7%
Number of Reports should have Received Statewide over 83~ Months 3,819
Estimated Annual Figure 5,391
~porting Agencies
Research conducted on the topic of battered women provides information on the
number of women who seek assistance from various service providers. One study of 41
abused women found only 21.9% had called police and only 19.5% sought counseling
from a private social service agency (Gelles). These data also indicate that the more
severe the violence or the more frequent the attacks, the more likely the woman is to
seek assistance.
Another research project on 60 battered women found that the history of marital
violence was known by the medical staff in a rural health clinic, in only four of the 60
cases (6% of the cases) despite the fact that most of the women and their children had
received ongoing medical care at the clinic (Hilberman and Munson).
This information is important in estimating the incidents of assaults on women by their
partners in the State of Minnesota in 1978, yet never saw a law enforcement, medical
or social service provider. Using a figure that I of 5 women, 20%, sought assistance
from one of the reporting agencies, a very conservative estimate of 17,895 incidents of
abuse occurred based on reports submitted from all law enforcement agencies. With a
moderate effort to contact reporting agencies, this estimate rises from 17,895 to
26,955 based on special sample results. In all probability, this figure would be greater if
an extensive effort was made to urge agencies to report all cases of abuse they have
contact with.
PAGENO="0298"
292
TABLE 3
Estimated Incidents of Abuse on Women Including those not Seeking Assistance
Law Enforcement Law Enforcement
(Total Population) (Special Sample)
Reported Incidents from 3/1/78 1,690 676
Projected Annual Reported Incidents 2,386 5,391
Estimated Incidents yiith 100% of 3,579 N/A
Cases Reported
Estimated Incidents Based on I in 5 17,895 26,955
Women Seeking Assistance from
a Law Enforcement Agency
I This estimate is based on the assumption agencies are presently
reporting 2 of 3incidents of abuse they have contact with.
Location of Incidents
Wife abuse occurs in every region of the state. Non-metro agencies representing 51.5%
of the population submitted approximately 36% of the forms. Agencies from the seven
county metropolitan region representing 48.4% of the population submitted the remain-
ing 64% of the forms. The larger number of forms from the metro area does not neces-
sarily mean spouse abuse is more prevalent in the Twin Cities. Services for battered
women were first provided in Minneapolis and St. Paul and a concerted effort was made
by shelter staff to develop working relationships with law enforcement, hospital and
human service personnel. These service providers may have a greater consciousness of
the problem than many outstate agencies who are just beginning to offer services for
abused partners in their area. Therefore, it is assumed that thetro providers have a
greater compliance in reporting assaults than non-metro agencies.
Figure I illustrates the population of the regions of the state and the number of
reported incidents of spouse abuse in each area. The percentage of the total reported
incidents of battering and the percentage of the region in relation to state population is
also listed. The numbers of reported incidents of battering in the seven county
metropolitan area are presented in Figure 2. See Pages 23 and 24 for Figures I and 2.
PAGENO="0299"
293
FIGURE I
Regianal Papulatian and Reparted Incidents at Partner Abuse2
A - 342,200
B - 8.6%
C - 263
D - 6.7%
2
PAGENO="0300"
294
FIGURE 2
County Fopulotion ond Reported Incidents of Spou5e Abuse
for the Seven County Metropoliton Region
3 Populotion figures ore estimates for Minnesota cbunties in 977.
PAGENO="0301"
295
Previous Assaults
Equally important to the number of reports received over a given time period is
information on previous assaults. Most physical abuse is not a one time occurrence
precipitated by a single event but a pattern of assaults that repeat over a period of
time. Murray Straus estimates that battered women experience a median of 2.4 violent
attacks annually. This figure is somewhat misleading because many are assaulted
monthly, weekly and eveh daily.
Findings from medical reports over an 8Y2 month period indicate only 17% of the women
had not been previously assaulted and 69% or 1,017 women had been abused before, 62%
by the same assailant. In 14.1% of the cases, the reporter did not know the response to
this question.
Women in shelters have been previously assaulted by the same person 92% of the time,
according to information given to the shelter staff. When asked if the assaults had
occurred more than Qnce, 505 or 92.5% of the 546 responding women housed in shelters
said yes they had been abused more than once.
Human service providers submit information on the length of physical abuse. Over 65%
or 538 of 795 women have experienced abuse for more than a year. Figure 3 illustrates
the percentage of women experiencing abuse for eadh time period.
FIGURE 3
Length of Physical Abuse
30%
25%I 21% 21%
20%I~
15%! ~ (N=795
11% Human
10% I Service
LI reports)
6 Months 6 Months 1-2 Years 2-5 Years 5 Years
or Less to I Year or More
L~9_91L~ 0 - 79 - 20
PAGENO="0302"
296
Profile of Abused Women
There is no one segment of our society that represents a typical battered woman. She
can be from 15 to 87 years of age, based on reports submitted to the Department of
Corrections. She can represent any racial background. Her family income can be low,
medium or high and she may be married or single.
However, if one were to compose a battering scenario based on the summary of results,
it would picture an urban, white, 27-year-old female being physically abused by her
husband. The couple has two children. The 27-year-old man who assaults her on a
Saturday night around 10 o'clock inflicts visible injuries on her in the form of bruises
and lacerations. The man has assaulted his wife on other occasions. Findings of the
data collection on age, race, the relationship of the woman to her assailant, the number
of children she has, and her education and skills are summarized below:
Women of all ages have been victims of assault according to our findings but 76% of the
women are younger than 34. Figure 4 illustrates the range in ages of abused women as
summarized from medical and human service reports.
FIGURE 4
Ages of Women Assaulted by their Partners
40
30
(N=2,345
20 Medical &
°"° 10 * H.S. Reports)
0
38%
15%
6%
25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65+
Age
PAGENO="0303"
297
Race
Of the 4,206 forms submitted over an 8V2 month period of time, 3,893 reporters
recorded the race of the victim. In 83.9% of the reported cases, white women were
abused by their partners while minority women account for the remaining 15.9% of the
reported assaults. Figure 5 illustrates the percent of reporting forms recorded for each
race and the percent of the total population of Minnesota represented by each race. In
relation to the total population according to data collection reports, a higher percent-
age of minority women are battered than white women. This may or may not be the
case. For example, white females may obtain medical help from private physicians
rather than a public hospital emergency room. Our results indicate that reporting by
private physicians is significantly lower than hospital personnel. A number of other
variables could contribute to the disparity, or, the figures may mean that a proportion-
ately higher number of minority women are physically assaulted by their partners.
It is interesting to note in Figure 5 that an even higher percentage of minority women
seek assistance from state supported shelters. Again, this may be a reflection on the
woman's financial inability to support herself in transition and not an indication of the
amount of battering that occurs in minority communities.
FIGURE 5
Race of Abused Women
100
90
80
70
60
50
(N=3,893
Law Medical
30 Human Service)
20 (N=594 Shelters)
10 8.6 9.6
6.9 6.5::::::: 1 2.2 1 ~
006 10 13 0510
~ ~*:*~::~::
American Black Chicana/ White Other
Indian Latina
Race
% of Reports
% of Race Submitted to
in Total E Department of % of Sheltered
Population ~ Corrections Women by Race
by Race
PAGENO="0304"
298
Relationship to Assailant
Reporters indicate that women are abused by husbands, ex-husbonds, boyfriends, male
friends with whom they live and male relatives. Most women are assaulted by their
husbands, and in many cases, by their ex-husbands. Many women living with male
friends or dating a particular person are also subject to physical abuse.
FIGURE 6
Relationship of Abused Women to their Assailant
60
51%
50 `7o (N=4,l02
Law, Medical
40 ooo and H.S.)
30 0000 00
% 17.7%
20 o:::oo 12.4% 0 : 11.8%
10 j ~00i ~J 27~ __
Husband Ex-husband Cohabitee Boyfriend Male Other
- Relative
Relationship
Number of Chlldren
Research indicates that many battered women and their assailants observed violence
between their parents as children. Two studies found that 33% of the women who were
abused by their husbands, witnessed conjugal violence and over 50% of their assailants
had observed violence between their parents. (Carlson and Gayford).
Human service and medical personnel record information on the victim's number of
children. Only 19% of the women seen by these professionals had no children. The
highest percentage of women have 2 to 3 children as illustrated in Figure 7.
FIGURE 7
Number of Children
50 42.0%
40
30 25.8% (N~2,059
18 7~' Medical and Human
20 13 2~' Service Reports)
10 = =
0 = =
0 I 2-3 4÷
Number of Children
PAGENO="0305"
299
Education and Skills
Women housed in shelters are high school graduates in more than one-half of the cases
and 20% of the respondents have post high school training. In 60% of the cases they
have not been employed outside the home in the past year nor do they have sufficient
job skills to enable them to obtain a job which will enable them to support themselves
and their children. These results do not reflect the total population of battered women
since results are only from women who seek shelter. It is believed that many women
who have the financial capability of supporting themselves do not seek housing in a
shelterS
Figures 8, 9 and 10 summarize responses to questions on the background of women in
the shelters.
60
50
40
%
30
20
10
0
FIGURE 8
Education Level of Sheltered Women4
61%
Education Level
College
(N=498
Shelter Reports)
4 These levels represent the highest education levels completed by
the respondents. People who have some college or vocational
training but didn't complete the programare included in the
high school figures.
19%
10%
10%
or
High Vocational
School School
PAGENO="0306"
300
FIGURE 10
Sheltered Women with Sufficient Job Skills to Support
Themselves and their Children
FIGURE 9
Sheltered Women Employed Outside the Home in Past Year
(N=509 Shelter
Reports)
(N=500
Shelter
Reports)
PAGENO="0307"
Profile of Assailant
The Department of Corrections has one source of information on the abusive partner.
Battered women housed in shelters throughout the state respond to questions on the age
of their assailant, his educational background and if the man has physically abused other
women. These results do not reflect the total population of battered women and their
assailants since results are only from women who seek shelter from their assailant. To
November 15, 1978, the Department of Corrections has received 604 forms on women
from six shelters in the state.
Assailants whose partners have sought shelter range in age from 18 to 80. Approximate
ly 50% of the men who have assaulted their partners are between the ages of 24 and 31,
as can be seen in Figure I
FIGURE II
Age of Assailants
Fifty percent of the men who assaulted their partners have a high school education,
although all education levels are represented. Figure 12 outlines the education levels of
men whose partners were housed in shelters in Minnesota in 1978.
50
40
30
%
20
l0
0
FIGURE 2
Education Level of Assailant5
51.3%
5 These levels represent the highest education levels completed by the assailant.
People who have some college or some vocational training but didn't complete the
program are included in the high school figures.
301
50.5%
60
50
40
%
30
20
10
0
18.3%
8.2%
(N=543
Shelter Reports)
8-24 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64
4.2%
65+
27.0%
(N=478
Shelter Reports)
Grade School High Vocational
or Jr. High School School
College
PAGENO="0308"
302
As one assessment of the past history of abuse by the assailant, the question is asked,
"Has this person abused other women?" Most respondents didn't know their abuser's
past history or the shelter staff did not request the information. Of 504 responses, only
17.2% of the women indicated their assailant had abused other women and 13.6%
responded "no" to the question.
Is Assailant Seeking Assistance
Human service providers ask women if their assailant is seeking assistance for their
assaultive behavior. Figure 13 illustrates responses of 795 human service providers
indicating that most men are not seeking assistance. The response on the number of
men seeking assistance may be high since human service providers are more likely to
see the woman and her partner than medical and law enforcement personnel who did not
respond to this quesiton.
FIGURE 13
Assailants Seeking Assistance
(N=795
Human Service
Reports)
An abused partner not only experiences mental trauma but physical injury in most
cases. The highest number of medical reports (79%) received by the Department of
Corrections are submitted by hospital emergency room personne~. A summary of 1,505
medical reports indicates that the abused person required medical attention 78.5% of
the time and hospitalization was required in 12.2% of the reported cases. This means a
reported 1,181 husbands or boyfriends administer a serious injury on their partners by
inflicting lacerations or bruises, fracturing bones, causing internal injuries or permanent
damage.
Law enforcement reports on 1,750 women indicated that they were visibly injured
56.8% of the time. This compares to 17.3% of the women who complained of injuries
and 2 1.9% who were not visibly injured.
Seriousness of Injuries Sustained
PAGENO="0309"
303
FIGURE 14
Injuries Sustained by Abused Women6
90 81.5 86.4
80
50
20 136152
`: 21 ~ ~536 ~ ~
Bruises Fractures Internal Other No Permanent Threat
`or bc- Injuries Visible Injuries Only
erations
Medical Reports
Human Service Reports
6 As reported by medical and human service providers percentages add up to more than'
00 because some reporters checked two or more responses. Medical personnel did
not record information on permanent injuries and threats only and human service
providers did not record information on injuries that were not invisible.
Agency Response ,
Critical to the issue of partner abUse is awareness and response by professionals when
they first see abused women. The Department of Corrections requests information
form medical and law personnel on their response to the situation and action taken.
PAGENO="0310"
304
Law
Many support groups throughout the state provide services to battered women.
Essential to their success is the referral of women to these services. Law enforement
people are increasingly informing women of services and programs for battered women.
Of 1,449 reports, 53.6% of the police who submitted forms to the Department of
Corrections stated they did provide referral information to the women. However, a
large percent, 39.6%, did not inform women of services even though they did not
indicate that there were no services in their area. Understandably, most of the "no
services available" response came from non-metro law enforcers. Figure 15 and 16
illustrate overall referrals to resources by law enforcement officers and a summary of
responses by regions to this question.
FIGURE 15
Law Enforcement Personnel Referring Women to Resources
(N=l,499 Law)
PAGENO="0311"
305
FIGURE 16
Referrols by Low Enforcement Agencies7
Yes - Provided referrol informotion
No - Didn't provide referrol informotion
N.A. - No Services Avoitoble
N - Number of responses to the question
PAGENO="0312"
306
Medical
On 1,505 forms submitted by the medical personnel from March I to November 15,
3,194 referrals were made on legal, housing or economic resources available to the
woman. Percentages of medical personnel making referrals are listed on Table 4.
TABLE 4
Medical Personnel Response to Referral
Services Available and Referrals Made
Number
Percentage
~~j:
Informed of criminal and civil legal process
Low cost legal service not available
Informed of rights to press criminal charges
Other
525
29
683
254
.
35
2
46
17
Housing:
Referred to shelter
Transported to shelter
Found other temporary housing
Women returned home
Alternative housing not available
Other
149
28
213
625
17
243
12
2
17
49
I
19
Economic:
Referred to Welfare Department
Other
139
289
32
68
Human Service
Providers of human services often have more contact with the battered woman than law
enforcement or medical personnel. From counseling sessions, discussions and obser-
vation they can assess what services or programs their client needs. They are also
familiar with other social services not available to their clients. Table 5 gives the
percentage of responses indicating a specific service is needed and the services not
available.
PAGENO="0313"
307
TABLE 5
Services Needed and Services not Available as Perceived by Service Providers8
Services Needed
No. %
Services Not Available
No. %
Safe Housing
Support Group
Legal Help
Medical Help
Child Care
Economic
Other
244 40
436 72
272 45
134 22
76 12
253 42
87 14
218 63
88 25
125 36
37 II
54 6
61 18
9 3
8 Percentages equal more than 100 because some women had more
than one need and often numerous services aren't available.
Comments
Comments by reporters often lend insight into the problem of women abused by their
partners. Much can be learned about the seriousness of the attack, the actions taken by
the victim and the history of abuse. A sampling of these comments are given below:
Serious injury is inflicted on victims of partner abuse:
- One police officer wrote, "The woman received carpet burns on legs from being
drug across the floor. She also experienced back pains".
- A nurse practitioner wrote, "Woman was battered by boyfriend who used fists,
coat hanger and threw her into a wall. Previous incidents of being slapped and
hit by telephone. Reluctant to call police because of fear of retaliation."
- Another wrote, "the woman was pushed downstairs by husband then kicked while
on floor".
- A physician stated, "the boyfriend bit off tip of woman's finger".
- Another police officer commented, "husband beat wife for no apparent reason.
Wife hospitalized and is pressing charges. Husband also sexually assaulted wife
with a whiskey bottle."
A number of reporters state that the assailant or +he woman was drunk, or both parties
were intoxicated.
Medical and police reporters occasionally indicate that the woman was raped by her
partner. One stated, "woman refused to have intercourse with her husband and he beat
her into submission".
Others state that the woman attempted suicide so she wouldn't have to return to her
husband.
PAGENO="0314"
308
Some reporters stated "the woman is pregnant and he hit or kicked her in the stomach".
Some reporters state that the woman initiated the attack and the man was defending
himself.
A number of police officers state that this is a repeated offense. Many comment that
the couple is separating or the woman has initiated divorce.
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Carlson, Bonnie, "Battered Women and their Assailants", Social Work, November, 1977,
pp. 455-460.
Gayford, J. "Wife Battering: A Preliminary Survey of 100 Cases", British Medical
Journal, January 1975, pp. 194-196.
Gelles, Richard, "Abused Wives: Why Do They Stay", Journal of Marriage and the
Family, November 1976, pp. 659-668.
Hilberman, Elaine and Munson, Kit, "Sixty Battered Women", Victimology, Volume 2,
1977-78, pp. 460-470.
Straus, Murray A., "Wife Beating, How Common and Why?", Victimology, Volume 2,
1977-78, pp. 443-458.
PAGENO="0315"
309
APPENDICES
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS PROGRAMS AND SERVICES FOR BATTERED WOMEN
LAW ENFORCEMENT DATA COLLECTION FORM FOR BATTERED WOMEN
INSTRUCTIONS: According to Chapter 428 Laws of MInnesota 1977. all law enforcement agencies are required to
collect data on women who have been assaulted and/or threatened with ashault by their spouses. male relatives, or
maleswithwhomthey areresidlngorhavereslded nthepaat.Thisformistobe edforwomen l8andover. Fold form
in half. Remove protective strip and seal ends together. Mall to return address printed on reverse of form.
Woman's Home Census fract or Zip Code Race: (6)
(1) 0 Am. Indian 3) ~ Chicana (~~0 Other (Specify)
(1-5) [~j (2) OBlack (4)0 white
Date of Incident: (7.12) Time of Incident: (13-16) Injury Sustained: (18)
Month Day Year ________________ A M (1 )DVisible Injury
[Jill! r~ I ~1(l7) * (2) OComplaint of Injury
I j~J P.M. (~)0 No Visible Physical Injury
Relationship to (l) 0 Husband (living together) (2) 0 Husband (not living together) (3(0 Male Relative
Assailant (19): (4) 0 Friend (living together) (5) 0 Friend (not living together) (6)0 Other(Specii5')
Did you inform the woman of services and programs for battered women: (20) (1) 0 Yes
(2)0 No
(3) 0 None Available
Badge number of officer: City:
Comments:
CR-00145-O1
PAGENO="0316"
310
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS PROGRAMS AND SERVICES FOR BATTERED WOMEN
MEDICAL DATA COLLECTION FORM FOR BATTERED WOMEN
NOTE: According to Chapter 428 Laws of Minnesota 1977, all physicians, hospitals, public health nurses, and law enforcement
agencies are required to collect data on women who have been assaulted and/cr threatened with assault by their spouses, male
relatives, or males with whom they are residing or have resided is the past.
The purpose of this form is to document the incidence of assaults on women. This information will be summarized in
reports. These reports so your respeclive county and the entire State will be mailed to you. We hope that lb ese reports will be
helpful in planning needed services in your area. We thanh you for your cooperation.
INSTRUCTIONS: This form is to be used when seeing women (18 and over) who have admitted to being threatened with assault
or who you suspect have bees assaulted (though it is not verified by the woman). Please checic all relevant boxes. Fold form in
half. Remove protective strip and seal ends together. Mail to return address printed on reverse of form.
Age:
.
Number of Children: Woman's Zip Code:
)3.4)fj~ (5.9)
Date of Incident: (10.15) ime of Incident: Race: Am.
Month Day Year ___________________ 0 AM. fl( 9 Indian (3) 9 Chicaca :5) 9 Other
(1619) 9P.M. (2) 9 Black :41 9 White (Specify)
Is Assault: (22)
Has Woman Been
Assaulted Previously:
(1) 0
Yes
If
so, by whom:
:74:
11) El Verified by Womun
12) 0
No
:1: 0
This Person
.
(2) El Suspected
(31 9
Unknown
21 0
Olher(Speciri)___________________
Relationship to 11) 2 Husband (living together) (21 9 Husband (ccl living together) 3l Male Relative
Assailant (25) :4) Friend (living together) (5) LJ Friend (not living together) (6)0 Olher(Specifr)
Injury. " -` `(.26)9. Bruises orLaeerations (27)0 `Feacture "-628s-9.lninrnei Injury . - -29(9.-No'Vis)b)e Injury- -- -.
Sustained. (30) 9 Other (Specify)
Did injuries require medical altenlion: (31) Did injuries require hospilalizaliof: (32)
(I) 9 Yes (2) 9 No ll( :i Yes :2: 9 No
WHAT ACTION DID YOU OR YOUR AGENCY TAKE:
MEDICAL:
133) 9 Gave medical attention (34) 0 Sent or tack to hospital (35) 9 GIber _____________________________
LEGAL: (36) 9 Informed of criminal and civil legal process 137) 0 Informed of rights to press criminal charge
(38) 0 Low cost legal counsel cot available (391 0 Other
HOUSING: (40) 9 Refereed to shelter (41) 9 Took to sheller (42) 0 Found other temp. housing :45:9 Returned Home
(44) 0 Alternative housing nat available (451 9 Other
ECONOMIC:
(46) 0 Referred to Welfare Department (47) 0 Other ____________________________________________________
SOURCE OF REPORT. (48) 9 Private Physician ~49 0 Public Health Nurse (50) 9 Hospital (physician, curse, elc.)
(51) 0 Palient Advocate (52) 9 Olher (Spccifs')
City:
rR.00I38,OI
PAGENO="0317"
311
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS PROGRAMS AND SERVICES
FOR BATTERED WOMEN
HUMAN SERVICE DATA COLLECTION FORM
NOTE: Minneaota State Statutes 241.62, Subdivision 5, specifies that oil phyosoians, hoopitala, publio heath nurses, ba
forceeent ogenoies, oooiol aorkers, and coennuns-sy health aorters are requsred to colloct inforeatsos on coeon eho hose been
ossoulted and/or threatened eith assault byospouse a cole relative, oroperaonoith ahon they ore reaidsng or heocre-
aided in the poat. In oddition, the Seporteent of Corrections is requesting thot you report on sen ohs are asaoultnd by
feeala relative, or o ooean they ore lining oith or hose lined ojth in the post.
INSTIO.CTIONS: This fore io to be filled out ohen oeeing een and ocean oho ore 18 and over or ohs are enonoicoted' esnors
(carried, pregnant or have a ohild, or living on their von) eho hose been oaooulted or threstened oith oosoult. It io to
be filled oat for each inoident of aoscult or threat of osoau It on all odults beginning July 1, 197f Cirole the
sppropriate anseero or fill io the appropriate booas. Please seed all foreo the beganno* ng of east eonth to: Bettered
Wheee'o Progree, Minnesota Secarteent of Correotions, 430 Metro Square Bualding, 7th and Robert Streets, St. Paul, MN 55101
Client's Sea (1) Client's Age: (2-3) Neeber of ohildren in house- Cluant's nip code: (6-10)
~~Je hold: (4-5) [~~1 1 I
Client's race: (11) Relationship of aoseilent to claent: (12-13)
1 A Id 1 Spouse (lining together) 7 Male friend (separated)
2 Bldn san 2 Spouse (separated) 8 Male relataoe
3 Chscaee/Hu5Panae/Latssa 4 Fenale friand (lining tagether) 0 Other (Specify) ___________
0th *~ 5 Feeele friend (separated)
eca _______________ 6 Male friend (lining together) _______________________________________
What injoriea hove hens sustained free assaults by this assailant: (Plesse chest all relevant ones)
l411 Bruises or lacerations l8~ Threatened physical injury only (ehen aeaoepaaaed by aeiaoitaes such as
1511 Fractures punching a cell, easing a beife, etc.)
16 Internal injuries 19 Other (Spesafy) _____________________________________________________
17 Pareanent injuries
hoe lang has this person eaperien cod physical abuse
free this assailant: (20)
1 6 eva. or lees 4 2-5 years
2 6
ecs. to a year years or core
3 1-2 years 6 Dcn't knee
Is assailant seeking assastance for has/h er assaultive behavsor:
1 Yes 2 Pb (21)
What specific prograes are available in your cceeunity taservsce
sassu ltuve persons:
(22) [T] 24-hoar telephone service
123) [] Treateant prcgrees for ussaultsve persons
(24) [1] Support groups for eussultive parsons
(25) [J Other (Specify)
In the client's opinion, stat services or progress
dces she/he need: (check all relevant ones)
)26)~ Safe end eecure housing eith 24-hr. protection
(27)[J Support groups or counseling
(28) Legal assistance
(29) Medical assistance
(30) Econceicesoistance
(31) Child care
(32) Other (Specify)
Please check all sot avaslable (at affordable cost to claent):
(33) Safe end secure hcusangaath 24-hoar proteotson
(34) Support groups or caunsalang
(35) Legal aausotanoe
(36) Econoesc assastassce
(37) Medscal assistance
(30) Chald care
(39) Other (Specify)
NAME (F REPORTER: 000NCY: CITY:
COt*NTS:
DATE REPORT 1 1 SATE SF INCICENT:
ca.IPLETED: -~
MONTH DAY YEAR . MONTH SAY YEAR
H9_91L6 0 - 79 - 21.
PAGENO="0318"
312
DEPARTNENT OF CCT~EC1 IONS
Services Form: Shotiers for Bsftered Nctt~n
ITTTCttTJT.S: fioa~o fill oat lOb tore to r evory three ecate criod. tttach this fcr~ to roq~asts for fo~oect
froc to Tatarvol of Corroctso~s. i~r~ a' to Cia
I (1-2) 1 000:,00vt CalIco for Catterod Woo
Stmlt or corletcrg fore: _____________________________ ~ 2 Sothoest ha-co's Skoltcr
Three cooth fond:
3 Ifooriot
~LT j H I~)
TO Lii J J ~ (5-14) 8 Ci11ar
PART A HOUSING
Total eccer ci .0cO hat~2; Total caccor of coilarcs ;ccoa: `Total c~Ocr of o::0e re4-00tira aaviv5
18-20 cobb to aoaav000te:
(15.17) . - (21_23)
I 1 `.1 Iii LI 1.1
taco ci c04_ o.oa:er cacao oorvg rcbct208 force: (26)fl ~ ooicje~a-cc oc2 roam
If co chy. (Chock relcva-t coos)
(24-25) . (07) Staff troicico
L (24) E'oolch reooocs
_______ (29) Fcociog
(30) (hOer (Spccify)___________________________
PART B PUBLIC )NFCR~AT(CN ANO REFERRAL
Cache: of phoco call s received roqacotioc ieforoatioa:
1
H ~
Ocher of letters rocoLe 4 rcqaeotieg iforratic.:
. (35-37)
I P1
Of.ea.lea Oae$oov;o aatraav:c~:
(38-39)
labor of ecoete:
later of pccplc be (43_43)
Total ricer of colors rocescad ot
.
PAGENO="0319"
313
DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS
Shelters Form: Shelters for Bettered Women
INSTRICTIONS: Please complete this form for evmry ooman end accompanying ohild(rsn) upon departure f roe the shelter.
Please attach these forms to your requests for payment from the Department of Corrections. Please osrole the appropriate
anseer øs~ fill in the appropriate boxes.
PART A PROFILE OF THE WOMAN
1gm: Last plocm of residenom zip Room: (8)
(1-2) code-: (3-71 1 tue. Indian 3 Chicano, Hispanic, Latina
2 Blaok ~ ISpmoify)
Highest level of education Has this conan been employed outside the home within tho past year? 1 fec 2 No
completed: (9)
1 Grade school or jr. high Does this coman have sufficient job skills to enable her ta obtain a job
2 High school chick sill suppcrt herself and her ohildrmn? (11) 1 Yes 2 No
3 Vocational school
4 College
Relationship to abuser: (12) Has ocean been previously assaulted Dnj uries sustained in previous assaults
1 Husband (living together) by this person: (13) 1 Yes by assailant: (Check relevant ones)
2 Husband (not living together) 2 Plo (15) Bruises or lacerations
3 Friend (living together) If yes, has this occurred sore (16) Fractures
4 Friend (not living together) than cone: (14) 1 Yes (17) Intarnal snjuries
6 Other (Specify) -- 2 No (18) Pereenent injuries
(19) Other (Specify) _________
PART B PROFILE OF THE ABUSER
Age: (20) Highest level of education Has this person abused other canen? (22) 1 Yes
[JJ S Grade school or jr high 3 Don't knee
Vocatnal school `
PART C PROFILE OF THE CHILDREN - -
Total nomber of children: Number of child ren cith ocean at shelter Has this child(ron) been physically
(23-24) by age of child: (Fill nunber in box) assaulted (intentionally inflicting
Nu005r af child ren as~th comon at (27) :~ 1-2 Years mark or injury) ky this assailant:
shelter: -y----, (28) L....J 3-5 Teases 1 Yes (31)
(25-261 L...L.....J (30) H 11-18 2 Do
PART 0 SERVICES UTILIZED BY WOMAN AND CHILDREN
ARRIViL DATE: r I 1 DEPARTL8E DATE: r i I 1 i ]IJ
MONTH DAY YESR HONTH SlY YEAR
PAGENO="0320"
314
PREPARED TESTIMONY OF HON. JOHN JOSEPH MOAKLEY, A REPRESENTA-
TIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MASSAOHLTSETTS
CHAIRMAN SIMON AND MY FELLOW MEMBERS OF CONGRESS,
IT IS A GREAT PLEASURE TO TAKE PART IN THESE HEARINGS
ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, I HAVE LONG BELIEVED THAT THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT HAS A LEGITIMATE ROLE IN THE PREVENTION
AND TREATMENT OF FAMILY VIOLENCE)
AND I AM GLAD TO OBSERVE THE VIGOROUS MANNER IN WHICH
MY COLLEAGUES HAVE UNDERTAKEN AN EXAMINATION OF THIS
NOTEWORTHY ISSUE,
AS OTHERS HAVE SAID BEFORE ME)
THE NATION HAS JUST BEGUN TO RECOGNIZE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
AS A NEW WAY OF VIEWING SOME VERY OLD PROBLEMS,
WITHIN ITS DOMAIN) DIFFICULT PROBLEMS LIKE ABUSED CHILDREN)
BATTERED WIVES) JUVENILE DELINQUENCY) AND ALCOHOL AND
DRUG ABUSE) APPEAR TO BE RELATED AND ARE OFTEN TREATED TOGETHER,
WE GET A SENSE OF HOW THESE PROBLEMS MAY INTERCONNECT AND
REINFORCE EACH OTHER, WE FACE THE OVER-WHELMING TRUTH
THAT THESE ARE VERY OFTEN FAMILY PROBLEMS)
CREATED AND SUSTAINED WITHIN THE HOME,
PAGENO="0321"
315
THIS REALIZATION) ACCENTED BY THE PHRASE
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, FORCES A SECOND REALIZATION, THAT
EVEN THOUGH THE HOME IS OFTEN A CENTER OF SOCIAL VIOLENCE)
IT IS NOT A PLACE WHERE WE AMERICANS APPROVE OF OUR
GOVERNMENT INTERVENING
OUR RELUCTANCE TO VIOLATE THE SANCTITY OF THE HOME HAS CAUSED
OUR POLICE AND SOCIAL WORKERS CONTINUAL FRUSTRATION IN THEIR
ATTEMPTS TO STOP OBVIOUS CASES OF CHILD ABUSE OR WIFE BEATING.
EVEN CASES OF DRUG AND ALCOHOL ADDICTION HAVE EVADED TREATMENT
WHEN THE SOLUTION INCLUDED INTERFERING WITH FAMILY AUTONOMY,
OUR MANY LAWS SAFEGUARDING PERSONAL FREEDOM AND PRIVACY
WITHIN THE HOME HAVE RENDERED SUCH SOLUTIONS UNACCEPTABLE.
DESPITE MY CRITICAL TONE, JAM NOT, OF COURSE,
ADVOCATING A LESSENING OF THESE SAFEGUARDS.
I WOULD VIEW SUCH AN ACTION AS A CURE WORSE THAN THE DISEASE.
BUT THE PROBLEM THEN REMAINS: HOW DO WE PREVENT AND TREAT
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE WITHOUT ENDANGERING THE PRIVACY AND FREEDOM
OF THE FAMILY?
PAGENO="0322"
316
I THINK H.R, 2977, THE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PREVENTION
AND SERVICES ACT) OFFERS A POSSIBLE SOLUTION TO THIS DILEMMA,
THE BILL DOES NOT INVADE THE HOME, BUT IT DOES ENCOURAGE
LOCAL, SYSTEMATIC AID TO FAMILY MEMBERS WHO REACH OUT FOR HELP,
IN H,R, 2977, THE FEDERAL ROLE IS CONFINED TO PROVIDING
GRANTS AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE TO LOCAL GROUPS DIRECTLY
SERVING VICTIMS OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, A FEDERAL INTERAGENCY
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE COUNCIL (IDVC) IS DIRECTED TO GATHER DATA
AND OFFER ADVICE ON THE MOST EFFECTIVE MEANS OF PROVIDING
NEEDED SERVICES, THE IDVC WOULD ALSO ADMINISTER A GRANTS-IN-
AID PROGRAM TO HELP STATES ANb LOCALITIES ORGANIZE RESPONSIBLE
RESPONSES TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, THESE RESPONSES MIGHT
INCLUDE SUCH PROGRAMS AS EMERGENCY SHELTERS, COUNSELING, REFERRALS,
AND TEMPORARY PROTECTION FOR THREATENED FAMILY MEMBERS~
PAGENO="0323"
317
BUT RATHER THAN DICTATING WHAT SERVICES ARE TO BE OFFERED,
THE I, D V. C. WOULD ACT AS A NATIONAL CLEARING-HOUSE
AND TECHNICAL EXPERT FOR LOCAL DECISION-MAKERS,
L,E,A,A,'S FAMILY VIOLENCE PROGRAM, AND C.S.A,'s
AND H,E,W,'S SPORADIC PROGRAMS ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
CONSTITUTE THE BEGINNINGS OF OUR FEDERAL RESPONSE TO
THIS ISSUE. BUT EACH OF THESE APPROACHES USES TOO NARROW
OR FRAGMENTED A STRUCTURE TO DEVELOP A COMPREHENSIVE
RESPONSE TO THE PROBLEM. H.R, 2977~ ON THE OTHER HAND,
GIVES ONE BODY, THE IID.V.C., A NATIONAL MANDATE
TO GATHER AND DISPERSE PERTINENT INFORMATION ON EVENTS
DEALING WITH DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, TO IDENTIFY OUT-STANDING
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROGRAMS IN ORDER TO SPUR THEIR
REPLICATION, AND TO ADVISE AND ENCOURAGE RESPONSIBLE
LOCAL DEVELOPMENT OF EFFECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEMS FOR
FAMILY MEMBERS SUFFERING FAMILY VIOLENCE,
PAGENO="0324"
318
THIS ADMINISTRATIVE, POLICY-MAKING ROLE IS NOT ONLY
APPROPRIATE FOR A FEDERAL AGENCY, IT IS CRUCIAL TO THE
CREATION OF WORKABLE PROGRAMS. As MY COLLEAGUES HAVE POINTED
OUT, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IS A NEW CATEGORY WHICH CUTS ACROSS
ALL OUR STANDARD DIVISIONS OF SOCIAL ILLS1 ITS TREATMENT
AND PREVENTION REQUIRE ASSISTANCE FROM POLICE, HOSPITALS,
COURTS, SOCIAL SERVICE BUREAUS, EMERGENCY SHELTERS, WOMEN'S
GROUPS, CHILD PROTECTION AND WELFARE AGENCIES, JUVENILE
DELINQUENCY OFFICERS, LEGAL COUNSELS AND NUMEROUS OTHER
INSTITUTIONS. SOMEONE HAS TO BEGIN TO FIGURE OUT THE NEEDS
OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE VICTIMS, TO IDENTIFY THE POTENTIAL
CONTRIBUTIONS FROM EACH OF THE AVAILABLE SERVICES GROUPS,
TO SORT OUT THEIR USEFULNESS AND TO MOLD THE EXISTING
POTENTIALITIES INTO AN EFFECTIVE DOMESTIC VIOLENCE SUPPORT
SYSTEM. A FEDERAL COUNCIL, EMPOWERED BY A BILL SIMILAR
TO H,R. 2977, WOULD BE IDEALLY SUITED TO COORDINATE THE
ANALYSIS AND PRACTICAL APPLICATION EFFORTS NECESSARY TO
PERFORM THESE VITAL FUNCTIONS.~
PAGENO="0325"
319
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE MAY ENCOMPASS A SOMEWHAT COMPLEX
WAY OF LOOKING AT VARIOUS SOCIAL PROBLEMS, BUT I THINK
IT ALSO SUGGESTS A VALUABLE NEW APPROACH TOWARD THEIR
SOLUTION IT POINTS SQUARELY TO THE FAMILY AS A POSSIBLE
SOURCE OF SOCIAL ILLS, AND IT ALLOWS US TO VIEW A VARIETY.
OF SOCIAL PROBLEMS AS PART OF ITS INTER-DEPENDENT
ENVIRONMENTS THIS CHALLENGING, WHOLISTIC PERSPECTIVE
DEMANDS EQUALLY COMPREHENSIVE FAMILY-ORIENTED SOLUTIONS
H,R 2977's INTER-AGENCY APPROACH HAS GREAT POTENTIAL
FOR MEETING THIS DEMAND, YET, BY RESPONDING ONLY TO THOSE
FAMILY MEMBERS SEEKING HELP, MANAGES TO RETAIN RESPECT
OF ESSENTIAL PRINCIPLES OF FAMILY AUTONOMY
WITH THIS BILL, I THINK WE HAVE MOVED BEYOND
THE POINT OF RECOGNIZING THAT DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IS
A SERIOUS AND PERVASIVE PHENOMENON IN AMERICAN LIFE
WE NOW HAVE A POSSIBLE RESPONSE TO THIS VIOLENCE,
PAGENO="0326"
320
AND I SUGGEST THAT WE ACT SWIFTLY ON THIS LEGISLATION TO
COMBAT IT, I URGE THE SUBCOMMITTEE TO CONTINUE THE
MOMENTUM GENERATED BY THESE HEARINGS ON H1R 2977, AND ISSUE
SOME DEFINITIVE LEGISLATIVE PROPOSAL ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
BEFORE THE SESSION ENDS,
AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK
ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE,
PAGENO="0327"
321
RURAL PERSPECTIVE ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Presented by Shirley J. Kuhle, GRI, CRS
Lincoln, Nebraska
President, Nebraska Task Force on Domestic Violence
Board Member, Nat'l Organization of Victim Assistance (NOVA)
Co-Chairman NOVA Domestic Violence Committee
In all probability, domestic violence occurs with no greater or lesser
frequency in rural as opposed to urban areas, but the problems faced by a battered
woman in a rural area are greatly compounded by the facts of rural life.
Its very difficult for many people to understand why the family unit, which
most of us think of as the very foundation of our society--especially in rural
America--and the place we look to for love, warmth and intimacy, is, in reality,
many times a battleground.
Though most people today have a growing awareness of the increase of violence
and violent crimes, we think of it more in terms of big cities and street
crimes--such as being raped or robbed or beaten by a stranger rather than the
attacker being someone we love or know intimately--and yet women are twice as likely
to be assaulted or murdered in their own homes than anywhere in the country In
other words, Wife Abuse is not just a big city problem--it is a national dilenina
just as prevalent in rural areas, if not more so.
The most obvious problem is the serious lack of human services in rural areas.
Where can a woman turn when the nearest doctor is 30, 50, or even 75 miles from
her home? When there is only one mental health counselor serving her county, and
three others as well? And some of those counties are larger in area than the state
of New Jersey. In her desperation, a battered woman can go to great lengths to
seek help if she knows it is available. Recently in Nebraska, a woman tried to
reach a shelter that was 150 miles away--on foot. After walking nearly 75 miles
with her small children on back roads, she reached a town that had a volunteer
task force, and they arranged for her transportation the rest of the way to the
shelter.
PAGENO="0328"
322
The sparse population and great distances between neighbors create an isolation
that is psychological as well as physical. Transportation to agencies is difficult
to arrange, especially if a woman does not have her own car. The lack of jobs and
opportunities to upgrade her skills contribute toward making women financial
prisoners of their abusive marriages.
In rural areas and small towns, anonymity is impossible. A doctor in a small
farming comunity of 1400 people, in the past months, has had five really severe
cases of Wife Abuse. For instance, he treated a young divorcee whose boyfriend
hit her in a jealous rage and broke her jaw in two places. He also hospitalized
a. married woman whose husband claimed she fell in the bathtub--she had bruises
and lacerations all over her body, two black eyes, and three boken ribs. Just
to give you some idea of the lack of documentation of these incidents in the past,
the doctor did check back through the hospital records and found that the man's
first wife had been admitted to the hospital five times with the same type of
injuries that she had supposedly received from falling downstairs, falling out of
a car, and, believe it or not, falling in the bathtub twice. We realize now that
a lot of battered women HAVE been hospitalized over the years without admitting
what really happened.
These cases represent the ones who HAD to seek help because of the extent of
their injuries (and yet the woman with the broken jaw sat at home for two days
telling members of her family she had a toothache because she didn't want anyone
to know what had happened to her. I think that attitude of concealment is much
more coniiion in smaller comunities than it is anywhere else. For instance, in a
city if a woman calls for.help she can usually remain anonymous, whereas in a
small town if she calls for help, she will very likely be the main topic of
conversation the next day, and she knows it. In fact, the rural woman caught
in a violent home situation suffers a VERY SPECIAL sort of isolation. There is
the obvious geographic location of a farm woman who may live anywhere from 5 to
PAGENO="0329"
323
50 miles, or even farther, from her nearest neighbor or town--and therefore from
help of any kind. This means that the batterer, who is generally over-possessive
by nature and actually wants to segregate his victim from society and thus make
her completely dependent upon him both emotionally and financially, has a
perfect built-in situation to do so. These women who suffer this GEOGRAPHIC as
well as SOCIETAL ISOLATION have the same feelings of depression and despair which
all abused wives have in common, but they are likely to be more severe because
she is really very much alone in her plight. We all quote expert Erin Prizzey
when she says, "they all scream quietly so the neighbor won't hear; but with rural
women it won't really matter whether or not they scream at alU"
Also, the law enforcement people who traditionally don't like to become
involved in family disputes are especially reluctant in small communities when they
know both parties personally. Those of us who have worked with Domestic Violence--
urban or rural--have encountered many of the same problems in dealing with
public officials, but several factors are present in smaller communities which
must be eonsidered, unique--and one is, as I have said, this personal familiarity
situation which is unavoidable in small towns. Added to this is the fact that,
unlike a city where the police force is generally quite large, the likelihood of
the same officer being summoned to the same home is reduced. But in small towns
where there are perhaps only three or four officers to be called, we find that
they are very antagonistic toward chronic cases or when the wife had called
before, even a few times. It wasn't uncommon for them to ignore her calls for
help altogether by telling themselves and the community, "so.and so is at it
again." So, until the advent of local Task Force groups, thisattitude most
certainly placed the rural woman and her children in a completely indefensible
position, with absolutely no place to turn for help.
PAGENO="0330"
324
When we began to establish a working relationship statewide with the local
police and county sheriffs, we soon realized that a variety of very understandable
procedures were being used to deal with family disputes and domestic violence.
Here again, of course, this can be true in larger cities, but city policeman are
required to take more intensive training in preparation for their work and
refresher courses are usually given periodically by professionals, whereas in
outstate Nebraska, all that is required to become an officer is several weeks
at the State Police Academy, and there is no provision for in-service training,
as such. So procedures policies are generally set at area meetings which can
include ten counties or. more. This means that when a poor policy is adopted,
it can be very widespread. For instance, we found that in a number of counties
they had devised what they decided was the best solution to family dispute calls,
and that was simply to jail both husband and wife. This, we were told, not only
served to separate the parties, but it discouraged future calls. We even had
highway patrolmen tell us this was what they did, because they are included in
these area mettings. It's hard to believe that anyone would ignore or even jail
a woman who has been beaten, but that's what was happening. Women were also
receiving very poor advice concerning their legal rights, because, to tell you the
truth, law enforcement officers in rural areas may not know themselves what the
statutes are or what options are available to a woman who has been assaulted.
Just briefly, I'd like to mention-just a.few other factors relative thain-1~
to rural areas, and one is the lack of available social service resources. Until
just recently, the closest mental health group for some areas was 80 miles away,
and that's not uncommon. We now have an area mental health counselor who rotates
her time in all of the towns in our four-county region, but she is already so
overburdened with work that she can't accept any new cases. She is, however,
training Task Force members who volunteer to be on call, because just like the
law enforcement people, she needs all of the help she can get.
PAGENO="0331"
325
We have no legal aid resources, and this has presented a rather serious
problem considering the fact that we many times encourage women to take rather
serious legal steps to solve their dilemas. Some local Task Force groups have
dealt with this by working with attorneys to develop a revolving system by which
each one will accept cases of this nature periodically, and other groups are
pursuing the possibility of counties hiring a public defender by district. In
other words, four or five counties would share the cost.
Financial resources that have been made available in larger cities in regard
to Wife Abuse, such as United Way, Salvation Army, YWCA, etc., are simply non-
existent in rural areas. So they have to depend upon people who do care, and
luckily, many of these people who care do live in small towns as well as big
cities.
But the determining factor which very often keeps a rural woman trapped in
a violent home is the fact that, if she leaves, the job opportunities are very
meager in her imediate area, and many times her lack of education and saleable
job skills discourage her from moving to a city, or anywhere else, for that
matter. She is then, actually a financial prisoner of her marriage, and actually
believes she cannot live without a husband or father for her children, no matter
how bad he is.
There are no long-term shelters available in Nebraska. The best we have
been able to provide in rural Nebraska are emergency shelters in motels outside
the inmiediate area, or in homes of local Task Force members ~ar enough from the
natural home situation that they can remain anonymous.
In addition to the factors of distance and population, rural can be defined
as a mindset. It is typified by an essentially conservative outlook on sex roles,
the family, and methods of problem solving. There is widespread acceptance of
stereotypic roles, and many people, including women, believe it is acceptable for
a man to beat his wife.
PAGENO="0332"
326
Finally, and this is perhaps purely speculative, but I have lived a great
part of my life in rural areas and I have found that rural and farm women,
probably because of polarization, are much more likely to accept their so-called
stereotyped sex roles in which the male dominates the female, and the husband
is the monolithic head of the household. Many still entertain the very antiquated
notion that the wife IS the property of the husband, to do with as he wishes, and
if he beats her she somehow ironically believes the inadequacy is in HERSELF.
SUMMARY: We need special training for law enforcement and mental health
agencies, legal and medical personnel. Often they accept the myths and are
unsympathetic, or when they want to help, are unprepared, both personally and
within their agency, to deal with the complexities of a battered woman's dilema.
We need to establish transportation systems tQ make human services more available,
because public transportation is inadequate at best in the cites of these states,
and non-existent in the small towns and rural areas. We need to expand and
coordinate the services that are available. Local volunteer groups have proven
very effective in rural areas and need support. Cooperation among agencies and
volunteer groups is essential and must be encouraged. We need networks of volunteer
groups and agencies, and some services, such as shelters, may work best on a
regional level in rural areas. This means cooperation and cormeunication. All
of these efforts must be aimed at the empowerment of women.
These projects need funding, of course, which is a major problem in rural
areas. Sparse population and great distances increase costs, and the small
population means there is less money available internally. Therefore, we need
small grants for local groups, larger ones for state or regional programs. There
must be special provisions, including no hard-match requirements, to insure that
less populous areas will get adequate funds.
PAGENO="0333"
327
We need large-scale education programs directed at the general public to
raise awareness of the problem of domestic violence, and to dispel the myths and
stereotypes that sourround it. We need to examine the causes of violence and
teach people alternative ways of dealing with stress, tension, and anger. We need
to change attitudes toward women, women's roles in society, the macho concept of
masculinity, and violence of all types. We must make it clear that violent
behavior is unacceptable. `Children must receive special attention in these
programs, for they are our hope for a non-violent future.
`~9-91'4 0 - 79 - 22
PAGENO="0334"
328
In all rrobanility, domestic violence occurs with no greater or lerser frequency
in rural as opposed to urban areas, but the proolerts faced by a battered woman in -
a rural area are greatly compounded by the facts of rural life.
Thg cost obvious problem is the serious lack of human services in rural areas.
Where can a woman turn when the nearest doctor is 30, 50, or even 75 miles from her
home? When tnere is only one mental healtm counselor serving her county, and tnree
otners as well? And some of uncse counties are larger in area than Ice state of
New Jersey. Inner desparation, a battered woman can go to great lenatos to seek
help if sne knows it is available. ~ecently in Uebras~na, a woman triec to reacn a
shelter, that was 150 miles away--on foot. After walkine nearly 75 riles with her small
children on back-roads, she reached a town that had a volunteer task force, and they
arranged for her transportation the rest of the way to tne shelter.
Tne sparse population and great distances between neignbors create an isolation
tnat is psychological as well as physical. Transportation to agencies is difficult
to arrange, especially if a woman does not have her own car. The labk of jobs and
orportunities to upgrade her skills contribute toward making women financial prisoners
of their abusove marriages.
In rural areas and small towns, anonymity is inrossible. Battered women often
attempt to conceal their injuries, knowing tnat if tney don't, they will most
likely be the main topic of conversatnon tne next day. One woman, whose Jaw was
broken in two places, stayed at home several days, telling her family that she had
a toothache before she sought medical attention. Anotner aspect of this lack of anonym-
ity is that police, wno are reluctant to cnterfere in `faintly disputes" in the first
place, are even core reluctant when they know both parties rersonally.
Inadditionto the factors of distance and population, rural can be defined as
a mindset. It is typified by an essentially conservative outlook on sex roles,
the family, and methods of problem solving. Tnere is widespread acceptance of
stereotypic roles, and many people, including women, believe it is acceptable for a
man to beat his wife. -
We need special training for law enforcement and mental health agencies, legal
and medical personnel. Often they accept the myths and are unsympathetic, or
when they :~ant to help, are unprepared, both personally and within their agency,
to deal with the complexities of a battered woman's dilemma. We need to establish
transportation systems to make human services mor~e available, because public transport-
ation is inadequate at best in the cities of these states, and non-existent in the
small towns and rural areas. We need to expand and coordinate the services that
PAGENO="0335"
329
are available. Local volunteer ~groups have proven very effective in rural areas and
need support. Cooperation among agencies and volunteer groups is essential and must
be encouraged. We need networks of volunteer groups and agencies, and some
services, such as shelters, may work best on a regional level in rural areas, whicti
means cooperation and communication. All of these efforts must be aimed at the
empowerment of women.
These projects need funding, of course, which is a major problem in rural
areas. Sparse population and great distances increase costs, and the small population
means there is less money available internally. Therefore, we need small grants
for local groups, larger ones for state or regional programs. There must be special
provisions, ibcludingmo hard match requirements, to insure that less populous
states will get adequate funds.
We need large scale education programs directed at the general public to raise
awareness of theproblem of domestic violence, and to disoell the myths and stereo-
types that surround it. We need to examine the causes of violence and teach people
alternative ways of dealing with stress, tension, and anger. We need to change
attitudes toward women, women's roles in society, the macho concept of masculinity,
and violence of all types. We must make it clear that violent behavior is unaccept-
able. Children must receive special attention in these programs, for they are our
hope for a non-violent future.
Nebraska lark F0t00
IlSTI(~ `IOLEX('E
Shirley J. Kuhle GRI CRS
President
PAGENO="0336"
330
NATIONAL SURVEY RESULTS
compiled for the National Technical
Assistance Center on Family Violence,
1917 Washtenaw Avenue, Ann Arbor,
Michigan. Funded by ACTION Grant
137-0106/1.
SUMMARY REPORT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
ASSISTANCE ORGANIZATIONS
D, O'Connor
October 30, 1978
PAGENO="0337"
331
In order to collect basic information about the type of programs
offered, the type of services provided, composition of staff and clientele,
and finances, a mail questionnaire was sent to 400 domestic violence organiza-
tions across the United States and Puerto Rico. (See Appendix A for a copy of
the questionnaire.) The instruments were mailed during the week of August 11
and September 20 was established as a cut off date for receipt of completed
questionnaires, thus allowing five weeks for dissemination and return. To
date 162 completed questionnaires have been returned, or a 40,5% return rate.
This is somewhat less than the 50% rate desired, but understandable given the
limited time frame and the diverse character of domestic violence assistance
projects. In some ways the normal bias in mail questionnaire response rates
works in our favor by including generally the best organized respondents.
The respondents encompassed all ten regions, but as expected some regions were
better represented than others. Nearly 70% of the respondents indicated that
they wished to apply for the regional technical assistance grant, though a
number who indicated that they wished to apply neglected to Include all requested
materials. Region 5, the North Central Region, has an especially high response
rate with 13 respondents from Michigan and nine from Wisconsin, while Region 6,
the Southwest, *has the fewest respondents. There seems to be relatively little
difference between the application rates for the regions.
The survey attempted to delineate, in an admittedly broad way, the
types of services each of the programs offered. In many cases there was tremen-
dous similarity as we would expect when looking at soqie basic services like
Information and referral where 98.8% of the respondents replied that they pro-
vided such a service, When it comes to a 24-hour "hot-line" service fewer, 68,2%,
PAGENO="0338"
332
Table 1
Region by Grant Application
4
Apply for
Grant
12
10
5 26
6 8
7 10
8 9
9 14
10 9
TOTAL ; 112
17.
1
4
3
3
5
50
Percent of
Total Applying
For Grant
53.8%
85.7
71.4
12 58.3
43 . 60.5
9 88.9
14 71.4
12 75.0
17 82.4
14 64.3
162 69.1
1
2
3
Not Apply
For Grant
6
Total
13
14
14
PAGENO="0339"
333
provide such a service. Even fewer, 54.6% of the respondents, provide crisis
outreach workers and here again there is no noticeable difference between
those applying for the grant and those who are not. Legal information and
assistance is provided by 79% of all respondents. Nearly all the organizations
provide individual counseling, 85.8%, but less than half, 47.5%, provide
long term counseling. While many organizations provide group counseling, 67.9%,
only 40.7% have counseling for the entire family as a unit. Likewise, few
organizations, 42%, provide couples counseling but those applying for the grant
are much more likely to have this service (47.3% to 30%). The same holds true
for counseling the assailant and counseling for the children. Nost of the
organizations provide what we would consider as the general counseling and in-
formation program for victims of domestic violence, but as the questions about
the program become more specific, fewer provide the service and the distinction
between those applying for the grant and those who are not becomes greater.
Most of the organizations do provide temporary emergency housing, 65.4%,
Both volunt~eer homes and hotels and motels are used, but only 41.4% and 34% of
the time. Slightly less than half of the respondents provide any kind of emer-
gency housing in a shelter facility. Those applying for the grant are much
more likely (507. to 38%) to use a shelter facility than those who are not applying.
Very few organizations, 19.8%, use a shelter for long term (31 days to six months)
housing of clients, but most do provide emergency transportation to housing,
63%, and emergency food, 64.8%. Nearly the same number provide assistance in
funding housing after the emergency housing is over.
Most of the organizations, 89.5%, provides special training for volunteers
and staff, seemingly a necessity for workers in this area. Public speakers upon
request are available from 96.3% of the respondents. The same is true for
PAGENO="0340"
334
Table 2
Volunteer vs. Full-time Paid Staffing in
Participating Domestic Violence Assistance Organizations
Volunteers in Percentage of those Percentage of those
the organization applying for grant not applying for grant
1-10 19.6% 30.0%
(22) (15)
11-20 19.6 16.0
(22) (8)
21-50 33.9 28.0;
(38) (14)
51-100 14.3 * 4.0
(16) (2)
Over 100 7.1 6.0
(8) (3)
Missing or none 5.5 16.0
* (6) *(8)
Full-time paid staff Percentage of those Percentage of those
the organization applying for grant not applying for grant
1-5 * 39.3 50.0
(44) (25)
6-10 20.5 18.0
(23) (9)
11-20 12.5 * 4.0
(14) * (2)
21-40 * * 8.0 6.0
(9) (3)
41-100 5.4 4.0
* * (6) (2)
Over 100 1.8 * --
(2) * * (0)
Missing or none 12.5 18.0
(14) (9)
PAGENO="0341"
335
conference speakers. Most organizations have written matetial available for
clients, 83.3%, the public, 85.8%, and staff, 84.6%. Applicants and non-applicants
only differ with respect to written material for clients. Of those applying
for the grant, 87.5% had such materials as compared to 74% for those not applying.
Very few respondents have written materials for sale, 22.2%, perhaps indicating
that most organizations make materials available for no charge.
Not unexpectedly, most organizations were initially formed *by volunteers,
79.6%, and many of the organizations, one third, are part of another organization,
most frequently the YWCA. Nearly all, 91.4%, of the organizations do have an
affirmative action/non-discrimination policy. Similarly most organizations have
at least a part time bookkeeper.
The number of volunteers and full time paid staff can be viewed as good
indicators of the size and scope of an organization. Most of the organizations
do have both volunteers and paid staff, but some important differences exist
between the two (Table 2). Those applying for the grant consistently have more
volunteers and more full-time paid staff. The differences are especially striking
with regard to paid staff where only 50% of the organizations not applying have over
five full-time paid staff while 61% of the organizations applying have over*.five
full-time paid staff. One of the most striking differences between.the applicants
and non-applicants is in composition of the staff. While 47.6% of the non-applicants
are entirely white, only 26.8% of the applicants have a similarly all white staff.
If one includes the organizations with a 90-99% white staff, the disparity becomes
greater, 41.2% to 66.6%. Very few organizations have a majority of black staff
members--five of those who applied and two of those who did not. One organization
has a primarily Hispanic staff, and there are a small number of Native American
and Asian-American staff members.
PAGENO="0342"
336
The clientele of the organizations is much more diverse than the staff.
Only 24.8% of those applying for the grant have principally white (90-100%)
clientele and non-applicants have 407.. Only 7.6% of the applicants have a
black (50% or over) clientele and even less for the non-applicants, 2.5%.
A single organization deals with a principally Hispanic clientele (95%) and one
organization deals with Native Americans (90%). Of course, regional biases
come into play since certain ethnic minorities are clustered in certain areas.
Equally as interesting is the distribution of clientele across family
income ranges. For applicants, 19.4% principally serve low income ($0-$6,999)
families and 9.3% of the non-applicants also serve this group defined by at least
90% of the clients being low income. When we lower the criterion so that at
least 50% of the clientele are low income, 78.6% of the applicants fall into this
category. The *corresponding figure for non-applicants is 69.8%. Since very
few high income ($19,000 and above) people are served, the remainder are middle
income.
The number of clients served each month run along a continuum but over
one .: third of the organizations saw 100 or more clients during the month prior
to the survey, an impressive statement as to the scope of the problem (see Table 3).
In fact by using the most conservative figures, the 150 organizations reporting
saw at least 3,500 clients in a single month. Again the applicants tend to see
more clients than the non-applicants, but not greatly so.
The organizations responding to the survey cover a broad range of. geographic
areas and populations. One third of the organizations represent areas with a pop-
ulation of 500,000 or more. Very few, 5, serve populations of 20,000 or less.
Correspondingly, most organizations serve an urban or combination or urban and
other type of region.
PAGENO="0343"
337
Table 3
Number of Clients Served in the Month
Prior to the Survey
Number of Percentage of those Percentage of those
Clients Served applying for grant not applying for grant
0~5 4,5% 6.0%
(5) (3)
6-10 1,8 2.0
(2) (1)
11-25 11.6 24.0
(13) (12)
26-50 20,5 12.0
(23) (6)
51-75 9.8 8.0
(11) (4)
76-100 9.8 8.0
(11) (4)
Over 100 35,7 30.0
(40) (15)
Missing 6,3 10.0
(7) (5)
Appendix B includes a detailed description of the algorithm where
each respondent was given a point total based upon the responses to the survey.
* This was used in conjunction with the other materials in order to rank the
respondents.
PAGENO="0344"
338
APPENDIX A
ACTION TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CENTER QUESTIONNAIRE
INSTRUCTIONS: i'iease answer all questions by checking the appropriate column, and/or °
filling in the blank. The information received will be compiled and distributed to ~
alirespondents. Please return to: The Domestic Violence Project, Inc., 1917 Wash- .~
tenaw Avenue,:.4nh Arbor, Michigan 48104 as soon as possible, BEFORE SEPTEMBER 22, 1978. .E
Thank you for ~`our cooperation. This questionnaire can be answered in 15 minutes of ~
less. Please fill-in and return even if you are NOT applying for an ACTION Grant.
1.! / / / / 1/ / / / / / / / / / / / 1/77/ / / / / / / / [7 / [TI/I / [77 a
NA~1E of organization you are representing in this questionnaire (1 letter per blai~) ~
2.1//I / / / 1/ / / I I / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /1/ / / 1/ [1/ / / / / 77 ~
, ~ `~ (num ) Cstreet) (city) ( tatBT(zip cod~T >
3.! / / 1/ / / / / / / I / [11/ / / / / / / / 77/77 17 [1/ [/1/ / /77 / ~
PHONE (Office: area code & number) (Home: ares. coda & number)
4.7 [/7/ [7 / / / / / / / I / / / / / / / / / / / / 1[7~[/~I/ / [7 / 7 [1 °
NAME of individual filling in form F3SITION .
YES NO ~
5.~ DO YOU i(ISH TO APPLY FOR THE ACTION REGIONAL TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE GRANT? _____________
6. DOES YOUR ORGANIZATION PROVIDE ANY OF TUE FOLLOWING?
7. telephone information and referral?_______________________________ :~
8. walk-in, person to person, information and referral?_________________ - -
9. a24-hour, 7 days a week crisis "hot-line" telephone assistance?_________________
JO. crisis, outreach workers'.who provide face-to-face 24-Hour assistance?______________
41. personal client advocacy with other agencies (social service, etc.)f
42. . individual counseling for victims of violence? . -
13. short term individual counseling (11 sessions or less)?_____________
14. long term individual counseling (12 sessions or more)? - - -~
15. grbip counseling for vi~tims of violence? . - -
16. counseling for the family as a group? . . -
17. couples counseling? . . J~
18. individual counseling For the assailant!____________________________ - -
19. individual counseling for children of violent parents? ___________ -
20. temporary emergency housing for victims and dependents?_____________ - -
21. emergency housing in volunteer homes? . -~ -
22. emergency housing in hotels and motels?______________________________ - -
23~ emergency housing in a shelter.facility for victims and chiidren?~J -
24. 5 days or less of emergency housing in a shelter facility?__________ -
25. 6 days to 30 days of emergency housing in a shelter facility? I j
26. 31 `days to 6 months of emergency housing in a shelter facility?_j -
27. transportation to and from your housing for clients and dependents?_j -
28. emergency food?_______________________________________________________
29. emergency clothing?___________________________________________________ - - -
3D. legal information and assistance? . - -
31. child care cervices?______________________________________________
32. assistance finding housing after emergency housing is over?________________________
33. special training for volunteers and staff? - - -
34. public speakers upon request? . . - -
35. conference speakers, panel members, workshop leaders or displays?_____________
36. written materials for clients?_______________________________________ - ________
37. written materials for the general public?____________________________________________
38. written materials for the training of staff and volunteers?______________________
39. written materials for sale? I ________
40. other services? list_________________________________________________________________
PAGENO="0345"
ACTION QUESTIONNAIRE
page two YES
43. Was your organization originally formed by volunteers?__________________________
42. Is your agency currently port of another organization?___________________________
43. Does your agency have a non-discrimination (affirmative action) policy __________
(Please enclose a copy if you are applying for the ACTION Grant)
Do you have at least a part-time bookkeeper?_______________________________________
45. What number of volunteers currently work part-time with your agency?_______________
46. What number of full-time paid staff work currently for your agency?________________
47. What date did your organization begin helping victims of violence?
- (month) (year)
48. What N of your paid staff is... 49. What N of your clientele is...
1. Caucasian? 1. Caucasian?
2. Black? 2. Black?
3.~Hiapmnic? 3. Hispanic?
4. Native American? 4. Native American?
5. Asian-American? 5. Asian-American?
6. Other, name ? 6. Other, name ?
agency serve lest month (direct services)?
4. 26-50
5. 51-75
6. 75-100
7. - 100 - more
51. Please list what percentage of your client's families you would consider
1. low income (0 - $6,999)
2. middle income ($7,000 - $18,999)
3. upper income ($19,000 - up)
100%
What type of area do you mainly serve?
1. urban
2. rural
3. suburban
4. other, name_____________
52. What size pdpulation do you serve? 53.
1. 20,000 or less
2. ~20,000 to 60,000
3. ~60,O00 to 120,000
4. ~l2O,000 to 250,000 _____________
.5. ~250,O00 to 500,000
6. 500,000 or sore.
54. Please list from what sources you receive fupds and the amount...
1. $________________ local city or township government,
county government,
4 ~ state government,
federal government,
6 private individual fundraising,
7 $ client fees,
other, list______________________________________________
Please feel free to ask the National Center questions. Thank you for your cooperation.
Today's Date . Signature_________________________________________
339
50. How many clients did your
1. 0-_S
2. 6-10
3. 11-25
PAGENO="0346"
340
APPENDIX B
ALCORITIPI FOR POINT ALLOCATION FROM SURVEY
I. A. Two points up to a maximum of eight for each year of operation
B. Two points for each YES answer to Qil and Q3O
C. One point for each YES answer to Q36-Q39
II. A. Two points for each YES answer to Q41 and Q45
One point up to a maximum of four for each year of operation if the
agency has volunteers
B. Three points for a YES answer to Q43
C. Four points for a YES answer to Q33
III. A. One point for each YES answer to Q7-Q1O, Q12eQ29, Q31eQ32
C. One to seven points according to the category checked in Q50
Three points if category 1 in Q51 is checked
Two points if category 2 in Q51 is checked
One point if category 3 in Q51 is checked
One to six points according to the category checked in Q52
One to five points according to the category checked in Q53
IV. C. One point for each funding source checked in Q54
* V. A. Four points for a YES answer to Q5
B. Four points for a YES answer to Q5
C. Four points for a YES answer to Q44
VI. A. Two points for each YES answer to Q34-Q35
C. Two points for each YES answer to Q7, Q8, Qil minus one point for a
YES answer to Q42
PAGENO="0347"
341
w Lopor 1. corii si no Lot P n "~~` cr5 1t tin n n n: 1 ysrI o~ the (in Li