The Facts
About Spousal Conflict:
Personal Responsibility Must Be Expected in Public Policy.
DadsNow
condemns all forms of domestic violence, but VAWA
fails to acknowledge that every responsible study shows that
women commit about 65% of child abuse, and at least equal violence against
men. VAWA perpetrates the adolescent myth portraying all women as innocent
victims, and men as the perpetrators. It falsely encourages the divorce
culture where about 75% of divorces are filed by women. It fosters the bias
of courts against fatherhood, where mothers are awarded effective sole custody
in at about 90% of divorces and 95% of paternity situations, and responsible
fathers are effectively excluded from the lives of their children.
DadsNow recognizes the fact that domestic conflict is an issue requiring
positive intervention in the majority of minor-conflict situations -- to
intervene in and treat the mental health problems that drive conflict. Our
public policy approach should hold both men and women responsible for their
part in marital disagreements and spousal violence. In situations of minor
marital conflict, public policy should positively to treat the underlying
mental health problem (such as chemical or co-dependency), encourage marital
responsibility for the benefit of children, and assure shared-parenting
in divorce when parental conflict is not associated with serious parental
mental health problems.
Truly Breaking the Cycle of Violence:
Gender is not the Problem
VAWA is a totally
ineffective approach to domestic violence because of the generational
cycle in which abused children are at high risk to become abusers as adults.
By failing to realistically address women's roles in child abuse, VAWA guarantees
that the next generation will face the same problems as this one. Boys who
are abused by their mothers are at high risk to carry anger into adulthood,
and become abusers of women. Thus this approach is not only ineffective,
it is actually a cause of the violence against women that every decent person
should oppose.
It is astonishing
that we have funded our approaches to domestic violence in the genre of
"First Wives Club" and "Thelma and Louise". The Bureau of Justice Statistics
recently reported
that 75% of spousal violence involved an offender who had been drinking.
Another 11% involves drug use, leaving only 14% of serious spousal conflict
unrelated to chemical abuse. In total, 86% of our domestic violence problem
is a function of drug and alcohol abuse by both men and women. The death
of comedian Phil
Hartman [September 24, 1948 - May 29, 1998] reminds us that men,
even rich and powerful men, have no place to turn to when dealing with a
violent spouse. His only choices: divorce her and lose a fortune or "wait
it out." We can never reduce domestic conflict or child abuse by listening
to those who play the "gender card" to entitle sexist agenda. It is quite
reasonable to suggest that we could cut our domestic violence statistics
in half were we to simply empower the responsible spouse to put the other
into treatment for drug use or alcohol, with a court record being generated
if that spouse fails to respond to treatment.
Proven treatment
programs, such as Hazelden
[the basis for the Betty Ford Center's treatment program], is how we should
deal with the majority of our domestic violence problems. Let us intervene
to improve mental health, not leave these problems to continue causing more
expensive and dangerous future problems.
We must address the upstream problems of chemical abuse and family, for
it will prevent much downstream human misery and save federal and state
agencies tremendous sums of money spent on the wide variety of downstream
problems associated with non-intact family structures.
If we truly wish
to reduce domestic violence and all forms of child abuse, we must repeal
VAWA and replace existing federal law with a gender-neutral Uniform Domestic
Violence Act.
VAWA Is about Expanding the Culture of Divorce and Illegitimacy
Below
you will see that that VAWA is not about violence. VAWA is predominantly
about creating a tremendous welfare state, enacting socialized health care,
entitling women's employment, guaranteeing unemployment benefits and free
housing for women, raiding husbands' retirement savings, and getting immigrant
status for illegal immigrants. Secondly, it is about entitling women's abuse
centers to spend your federal dollars as they please, and to unfund any
organization that might not agree with their approach. Last, it is about
inculcating propaganda founded on misandry into our public schools and universities.
VAWA is about encouraging, creating, and entitling single motherhood at
the expense of families, businesses, state coffers, and the taxpayer. Abuse
is the excuse, the 'imagery' powering a Trojan
Horse, as will be proven below in our point-by-point hyperlinked
legislative analysis.
Recognizing the real
agenda of VAWA is so simple. VAWA defines a "determination" of abuse as
nothing more than the statement
of the victim. All the funding provisions of VAWA come alive
(and stay alive) simply on the basis of statements uttered by a purported
victim.
The sexual and physical 'fear' language used in VAWA is just the latest
smokescreen for welfare state agenda. The language is nearly identical to
the hysterical broadsides used by the Women's Ku Klux Klan 120 years ago
that fueled the nationwide, fearful discrimination against blacks. A century
later, the welfare state hopes to permanently entitle itself by blowing
a nationwide smokescreen of fear about husbands, fathers and men.
The same people who tried to sell us welfarism in the name of "National
Health Care", who tried to wipe out immigration laws, who have told us that
HUD housing would save America's poor, who tried to sell us "womb to tomb"
and failed on all accounts, think Americans will not notice this same agenda
if it is hidden in the sanctity of "domestic violence legislation." They
are wrong.
America's scholars are now speaking out, rejecting VAWA, and calling for
its replacement with a truly gender-neutral Domestic Violence Act.
Leaders, Scholars, and Women Oppose VAWA II
and Call For Change In Approach
A significant
number of nationally-recognized professionals, scholars, and informed authors
who call you and your organization to stand up for family values in calling
for significant changes in federal (and international) approaches to domestic
conflict:
"Spouse
Abuse: A Two-way street", by Dr. Warren Farrell, Ph.D,
author of "The Myth of Male Power" and former board member of New York
NOW.
In PDF or
HTML
format.
'Positive
Partners, Strong Families': a constructive solution', by Dr. Felicity
Goodyear-Smith, Author of "First, Do No Harm", and fellow researcher
at the University of Auckland, New Zealand. In PDF
format.
'Abuse
Centers Don't Help Men', by Philip Cook, author of "Abused
Men: the Hidden Side of Domestic Violence." In PDF
format.
"VAWA
II Must Be Stopped", by Erin Pizzey, founder of the first domestic
violence shelter ever opened. In PDF
format.
"Fighting
False Claims of Domestic Abuse", by Ronald L. Isaacs J.D., (new
book) In PDF
or format.
`Innocuous’
violence triggers the real thing, by Scott Sleek [APA Journal, Vol
29 , No. 4 -April 1998. In HTML
format
Battered
Men, [JAMA, August 27, 1997; JAMA. 1997;278:620] In HTML
format
Physical
Assaults By Wives: A Major Social Problem Dr. Murray A. Strauss,
edited by Richard J. Gelles and Donileen R. Loseke. [1993, Current Controversies
on Family Violence]. In
PDF format [678k] - with emphasis added.
UNH
Researcher Explains Why Women Physically Attack Husbands at about the
Same Rate as Men Attack Wives University of New Hampshire News,
March2, 1998. In HTML
format.
`Women
Abuse Men: It’s More Widespread Than People Think, by Armin Brott
[Washington Post, December 28, 1993]. In HTML
format
Prone
To Violence, By Erin Pizzey. Available in HTML
format.
Stuart
Miller on Domestic Violence, in TEXT
format, or WORDPERFECT
6.0 format.
Compendium
of citations on domestic violence, in HTML
format
Reducing Child Maltreatment, Abuse, and Neglect
VAWA leaves
many children in the care of women abusing drugs and alcohol (as cited above).
According to the the recent report Child
Maltreatment 1995: Reports From the States to the National Child Abuse and
Neglect Data System, Table D5 issued by the U.S. Department of
Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, women
were the perpetrators in 74,184
out of 119,767 total cases of child maltreatment (62%). Children
are nearly twice as likely to suffer abuse by their mothers as by a man.
We can best help these children by making it possible for responsible fathers
to get help for the family when mothers get violent, rather than blaming
it on the man, who is driven from his home under VAWA. Let us place government
pressure on the side of children, rather than using it against them.
Why VAWA is Antifamily
|
It
is anti-family to use federal funds to negatively intervene in situations
of minor spousal conflict. Monies should be applied towards helping
troubled spouses heal from commonplace preventable and treatable disorders
(such as chemical dependency and co-dependency). Instead of helping
American women get what they really wanted all along, VAWA drives
divorce, serious downstream family conflict, and usually places children
in the custody of the unhealthy parent.
|
Children require
the benefits shared-parenting in marriage or divorce wherever possible,
yet our divorce statistics tell us that we are doing just the opposite on
a nationwide scale: three
out of four children will lose their father in divorce primarily because
programs such as VAWA are funded to achieve this result.
Why Women Should Reject VAWA
Women who care
about women have a vested interest in stopping VAWA. VAWA's approach hurts
many women. Instead of urging for programs that would help alcoholic women
deal with their problems so that their families might survive intact, VAWA
intentionally waits until the family situation is chronic, and then urges
women to get a divorce. VAWA's approach results in an alcoholic woman living
in poverty trying to raise kids all by herself with the customary assortment
of work, daycare, and health care related problems we read about in the
newspaper every day. The futures of women in trouble would significantly
improve, were we to help them get well rather than sending them into dire
social straits. Likewise, women confronted with the problem of an alcoholic
spouse presently only have two choices: get a divorce and live in poverty,
or 'live with it'. Most women would be far better off if they had a third
choice: getting him into treatment! Let us fund the upstream solutions,
not create more downstream problems for women!
|
|
It
is time for stop playing gender politics at the expense of women,
children, men, and their families, and start dealing with the problems
that lead to domestic conflict! |
We have prepared
an educational handout, "The
Truths of Domestic Conflict" [PDF format] containing the factual,
unemotional, unsexist truths about spousal conflict. Please copy it and
share the truth with the public and your legislators.
Friends of the Women's
Freedom Network are not afraid to stand up to NOW. Here is the
truth
about spousal conflict, presented by women who do not play power politics
at the expense of other women.
The absurdity of VAWA I is so obvious that public ridicule of VAWA II is surely
imminent. Those who enjoy a solid musical broadside will enjoy "VAWAII"
[44.1
khz stereo, MP3 format, 3.6 MB] or [8
khz streaming realaudio], a parody of Olivia Newton John's hit-single
"Physical", written and recorded by Dave Usher. Dave hereby gives his permission
for this fabulous pork-popper to be broadcast on all radio stations and
for public performances for informational purposes so long as the recording
is not sold, and so long as the ACFC website is given verbal on-air credits.
(hard sale rights are reserved).
VAWA:
A Deceptive Approach to Domestic Conflict
Would any organization
stand up and admit to condoning, permitting, or enabling domestic violence?
Would any organization blind their eyes and ears to half of all serious
acts of domestic abuse in America?
Reading NOW's
slick congressional testimony, one would never suspect that women
were ever violent. You may see about NOW's direct involvement in the drafting
and introduction of VAWA II and similar bills here.
The vast majority of domestic violence resulting in injury to a spouse occurs
after the date of separation [Chadwick
& Heaton], yet VAWA's approach is to break up families and send
them into the serious forms of violence that they supposedly wish to prevent!
Family violence is unacceptable no matter who initiates it. Every
major study on domestic violence reports that women are responsible for
at least half of serious spousal altercations. Yet there is not one dime
of funding, not one government program, or one educational campaign that
impacts female-on-male violence.
Abuse Centers and Crisis Hotlines Don't Help Men!
A responsible
husband trying to get help for himself and his family has no options. Abuse
centers and crisis service hotlines do not help men, and are quick to inform
the caller of this fact. Many members of ACFC and other organizations have
experienced disquieting fact. Here
is a transcription of one such call.
Philip Cook, Author of "Abused
Men, the Hidden Side of Domestic Violence", has written a special
article for ACFC about this serious policy problem.
The purpose in pointing this out is not to turn men into yet another victim-group.
It is to show that because we fail to put men on an equal footing with women
in family matters, we hurt women and children as well. By adhering to VAWA's
attitudes, we can never deal with the problems that drive spousal conflict.
The recent situation at Independence
House in Hiannis, MA immediately brings to mind the clearly unconstitutional
aspects about how federal funds are being spent in reserving the entire
domestic violence issue solely for disposition by certain women. Women's
centers routinely and openly make gender an immediate factor not only in
their support services plans, but in their general hiring and appointment
practices, a clearly unconstitutional violation of U.S.
Code.
Even setting the
obvious federal constitutional considerations aside, our hotlines and crisis
services must be funded and operated to help all callers who are confronted
with the problem of a drunk, violent spouse, if we, as a nation, wish to
address the problem of domestic violence appropropriately and constructively
in each case.
From Fiction, to Fact, to Booming Divorce Business
Much of the
money provided by VAWA is not used to prevent or intervene in cases of real
domestic violence. According to Dr. Murray Straus, most marital disagreements
are the kinds of minor and infrequent spousal disagreements that we are
all familiar with.
Much of VAWA funding is siphoned off to small business organizations (SBO's),
and non-governmental organizations (NGO's) operating under 'politically
correct' names who use VAWA funds for advertising and programs promoting
the image of the 'evil' male, encouraging unnecessary divorce, denying children
a loving father, and blaming women's problems on men. The exaggeration of
domestic conflict data elevates these minor spousal disagreements to the
status of serious 'clinical' abuse, with any conflict inuring to the funded
benefit of the National Organization of Women.
For example, Murray
Straus, a leading researcher of domestic conflict, tells us that
the injury-adjusted rate for the oft-advertised slogan "one woman is hurt
every 15 seconds" (which is based on police report claims) is actually 90%
less.
These SBO's and NGO's create unipolar perspectives on domestic violence with
a heavy emphasis on radical feminist politics intermixed, which is then
fed into the court systems. For example, the primary domestic violence resource
link on the website of the National
Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges is Safety
Net, a radical feminist website (cybergrrl).
Universities and "researchers" are involved too. Many of us are aware that
college campuses are the seedbed of radical feminism. They take VAWA money,
regurgitate monocular perspectives about women's problems, and feed it back
into the political system and media. For example, the Violence
Against Women Prevention Research Center (VAWPRC), a collaborative
sponge operated by the Universities of Minnesota, Arizona, and Iowa; is
is deeply involved too. VAWPRC's
proposed plan is, by its own language, a funded "thunk" tank
of radical activists and educators intended to generate feminist propaganda
and get more money. So-called 'children's
groups are deeply involved, and the media
is blinded by the massive misinformation campaign.
Supposedly "private" organizations, such as the Family
Violence Prevention Fund, believe that we should only intervene
"if the man hits the woman"; steering national and world policy while taking
"donations" from sources that probably represent a recycling of our tax
dollars for sexist purposes.
The American
Bar Association is a major perpetrator of prefiltered
"statistics" about domestic violence, framed as a sexist
entitlement of radical feminist attorneys, who make a killing at the expense
of the American family, society, and businesses. What is worse is that lawyers
in the federal
government provides large amounts of funding to the ABA to "educate"
lawyers and spread this myth in public, while the ABA seeds future profits
by crafting perverse "model
state code", all of which is parallel to VAWA II.
Conflict of
Interest: If we would not let tobacco companies tell us what to do about
the problem of teen smoking, we cannot allow the Bar Association, lawyers,
and radical feminists to tell us what to do about the problem of domestic
conflict, particularly where their solutions demand that we give them billions
in taxpayer money and give them sole license to loot families, businesses,
taxpayers, and insurance companies.
VAWA is nothing more than seed money for the 'divorce culture'. It is the
marriage between the Bar Association and feminists that drives divorce,
with VAWA using domestic violence as the latest trojan horse for its social
agenda.
The
Fear Campaign: Abuse is hiding under every rock
It is important
to realize the scale and scope of the fear campaign being waged. Most
folks remember the political riot over child abuse that resulted in
the McMartin, Wenatchee, and Little Rascals Day Care witchhunt cases.
The same political forces that instigated the "child abuse" riot now
drive the present domestic violence witch-hunt, which even extends to
recent claims that domestic violence is now a major problem in the workplace,
when in fact it does not even register in studies and analysis of workplace
safety problems. The politics of paranoia run deep -- so
deep that a resolution
is being debated in Congress suggesting that animal abusers and wife
abusers are one and the same.
It is crucial for Americans to understand the historical importance
of the recent shift from selling 'fear of child abusers' to 'fear of
wife abusers'. Radical feminists, the Bar Associations, and certain
politicians entitled themselves selling you the child abuse riot, which
ultimately fell apart because it is difficult to program a child to
allege abuse that never happened. Many families, insurance companies,
and businesses were looted by these individuals. But now, they hope
to sell you "woman abuse" to keep their perches of political power and
line their pockets in the courtrooms across America, at the continued
expense of families, businesses, and insurance companies.
What Is In VAWA?
Here is
what VAWA does:
Define
a legal "Determination" that domestic assault took place solely on the
statement of the alleged victim, unless the "agency" has
an independent, reasonable basis to find the individual not credible.
{Sec. 404 (2)(B)(i) and (vi). With this home-made "Determination" of
abuse, all the other provisions of VAWA II become effective.
[Note the true meaning of this provision once combined with the next item]
Deny
funding to any domestic violence center that questions or attempts to
assess abusive behaviors, motives, or credibility of a woman claiming
to be a victim (Sec. 251(b)(4)).
Amend
the Parental Kidnapping Act to federally-fund child kidnapping by allegors
of abuse (whether abuse occurred or not). Even one alleged incident
of abuse invokes absolute immunity from prosecution.
Remember
that "victim" status is based solely on assertion.
Amend
the Employee Retirement Income Security Act and I.R.S. Code to permit
looting of retirement accounts and tax refunds of alleged perpetrators
by those alleging child abuse.
Fund
H.U.D. to provide permanent free housing to any woman who alleges spousal
or child abuse
Remember
that "victim" status is based solely on assertion.
.
Require
health care insurance companies and worker's compensation plans to provide
permanent insurance coverage to any woman alleging abuse
Remember
that "victim" status is based solely on assertion. .
Bar
deportation of illegal immigrant women who claim abuse, grant immigrant
status, automatically give them welfare benefits, while prosecuting
the alleged perpetrator.
Make
it nearly impossible for employers to dismiss or discipline women who
allege domestic abuse, and award attorneys fees against employers
dealing with emotionally unstable female employees.
Create
unemployment compensation and paid leave entitlements. Employers
would be gagged from internal discussion questioning why the leave is
necessary.
Fund
the kidnapping of children across state lines by women who allege domestic
violence or child abuse.
[Remember
that "Victim" status is legally recognized solely on the basis of an assertion
of domestic violence or child abuse.]
Fund
"Youth" programs to spew antifamily radical feminist propaganda into
our public schools.
Fund
only NGO's and SBO's to tell governmental agencies what to do.
Fund
attorneys and the Bar Associations to provide free services only to
women alleging abuse.
Codify
into federal law a large collection of radical feminist propaganda deeply
skewed along gender lines. For example, parental alienation syndrome
(where a parent programs a child to dislike or hate the other parent)
would be legislated out of existence.
Re-define
the definition of domestic violence in the Omnibus Crime and Safe Streets
Act to exclude 'acts of self defense.'
Remember
that "victim" status is based solely on assertion.
Create
a strong federal
presumption for sole maternal custody irregardless of who actually
did most of the childcare, the quality of the childcare, or other factors
of marital moral responsibility. [Sec. 241 (1)].
Fund
the establishment of "Supervised Visitation Centers" to study all the
fathers who become "perpetrators" on the sole basis of an assertion
of abuse. Existing NGO's would have line-item veto over funding
of these centers, assuring adherence to the female-victim model.
Mandate
that domestic violence treatment centers help only women. Existing non-governmental
abuse centers would be given state-level "line-item-veto" authority
to approve/dissapprove applications for new centers.
Blame
any domestic disagreement on men, and deny funding to any organization
that disagrees with this approach.
Where
spousal conflict is alleged to have taken place, children would no longer
be able to benefit from parenting by the noncustodial parent.
Where
serious spousal conflict is alleged, shared parenting would be precluded,
inuring to the benefit of a custodial parent irregardless of the source
of conflict.
So, What Is The Answer?
|
Let us reform domestic violence laws to impact the problems that truly
drive the majority of domestic conflict. For example, we need legal
mechanisms in place to allow a responsible spouse [regardless of gender]
to get a chemical-abusing spouse into treatment under court order.
Co-dependecy and sexual addictions should be approached in similar
fashion. In general, policies dealing with non-clinical, minor cases
of spousal disagreement should generally expect that spouses work
through the normal processes of marriage and aging, and that mental
health problems be treated rather than exascerbated. Let us demand
marital responsibility of spouses! |
|