Domestic Violence: Why Doesn’t She Just Leave? The Courts Won’t Let Her!

Battered Mothers are NOT allowed to leave the Batterer. If they do— The Mother is then punished buy the Courts, by loosing her children to the man who terrorized and brutalized her. The ultimate form of control on the batterers part just short of murder. For a lot of the moms who have lost their children to abusers, it is a death they must endure daily – worst than death.

Amplify’d from www.nowayoutbutone.com

THE PROJECT: No Way Out But One is a feature length documentary currently in post-production. It tells the story of an American woman accused of kidnapping her own children, a woman who fled the country and became the first American to be granted asylum by the government of the Netherlands on grounds of domestic violence. The 13-minute version presented here serves as a trailer for the feature and a documentary short. Read more here THE STORY: In 1994 Holly Collins became an international fugitive when she took her three children and fled the United States to protect them from abuse. The family courts had ignored medical evidence of domestic violence and gave full custody of Holly’s children to the man they named as their abuser – her ex-husband and the children’s father. Wanted by the FBI, Holly became the first U.S. Citizen to receive asylum from the Netherlands. Read more here. THE LARGER PICTURE: In No Way Out But One, Holly Collins shares a story that in many respects is like thousands of others. It is estimated that 58,000 children a year are ordered into unsupervised contact with physically or sexually abusive parents following divorce in the United States. Read more here. IN THE END: Unlike so many of the other tragic stories happening around the country, Holly was able to protect her children and keep them safe. Despite all the harrowing trials, her story ultimately has a happy ending. Even though she and the kids had No Way Out But One. Read more at www.nowayoutbutone.com

 

See this Amp at http://bit.ly/tQo0EH

Topeka Kansas: Successfully Votes Making “Domestic Violence Legal”

I witnessed the Council of elected officials support the decriminalization of domestic violence within the city limits of Topeka and berate speakers, who were survivors and victims. The elected council members temper tantrums during the meeting and finger pointing were disgusting.”

Amplify’d from timesupblog.blogspot.com

In Topeka, Kansas on October 11, 2011, members of the City Council voted and successfully repealed the city’s ordinance banning domestic violence during National Domestic Violence Awareness Month. Talk about a punch, a kick and slap for victims of intimate partner violence by city government’s financial misconduct as their excuse for not wanting to do their jobs. At the center of dysfunction, the absent District Attorney Chad Taylor, who is refusing to prosecute domestic violence crimes in the city. During the two hour televised council meeting, the one sided discussion from 7 of the 10 elected members amounted to nothing more than political finger pointing. Leading the charge, and ultimately dictating the vote, was Interim City Manager Dan Stanley, brow beating those during the hearing into submission of his way or the highway. It was classic manipulation “101” presented in a live stream real time format.

support the decriminalization of domestic violence within the city limits of Topeka and berate speakers, who were survivors and victims. The elected council members temper tantrums during the meeting and finger pointing were disgusting.” Approximately 24 years ago, after years of lobbying by victims, advocates and families of those slain by their partner, legislation was signed by Governors nation-wide making domestic violence a crime. The pen used to sign the bill, was not filled with ink, but the blood of all those who lives were lost at the hands of those professing to love them.

attendance at the City Council meeting, “I witnessed the Council of elected officials

This “stunt” today will cost Topeka more than the mere 10% budget shortfall cited by city officials as the reason not to prosecute. Expect an increase in intimate partner related missing persons cases (providing they will still be allowed to make a report) and count on more funerals for those victims whom the police did not respond. This certainly gives new meaning to creating prevention and awareness during National Domestic Violence Awareness Month, doesn’t it?

· “16,800 homicides (that are reported) attributed to intimate partner homicide per year, 2.2 million medically treated injuries costing $37 BILLION per year.[i] [CDH1] · The cost of intimate partner violence exceeds $5.8 billion dollars each year; $4.1 billion of which is for medical and mental health services.”[ii] · Almost one-third of female homicide victims that are reported in police records are killed by an intimate partner.[iii] · In 70-80% of intimate partner homicides, no matter which partner was killed, the man physically abused the woman before the murder.[iv] [CDH2] · Less than one-fifth of victims reporting an injury from intimate partner violence sought medical treatment following the injury. [v][CDH3] · Intimate partner violence results in more than 18.5 million mental health care visits each year.[vi] [i] NCDAV reporting sourced from: The Cost of Violence in the United States. 2007. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Centers for Injury Prevention and Control. Atlanta, GA http://www.ncadv.org/files/DomesticViolenceFactSheet(National).pdf [ii] NCDAV reporting sourced from: The Cost of Violence in the United States. 2007. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Centers for Injury Prevention and Control. Atlanta, GA http://www.ncadv.org/files/DomesticViolenceFactSheet(National).pdf [iii] Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reports “Crime in the United States, 2000,” (2001) [iv] NCDAV report sourced from: Campbell, et al. (2003). “Assessing Risk Factors for Intimate Partner Homicide.” Intimate Partner Homicide, NIJ Journal, 250, 14-19. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice [v] U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, “Intimate Partner Violence in the United States,” December 2006 [vi] Costs of Intimate Partner Violence against Women in the United States. 2003. Read more at timesupblog.blogspot.com

 

See this Amp at http://bit.ly/qmDYCP

Make My Case Count! Jessica Gonzales v. USA – IACHR Final Report

International Commission Finds United States Denied Justice to Domestic Violence Survivor
Jessica Gonzales v. USA – IACHR Final Report http://www.aclu.org/womens-rights/jessica-gonzales-v-usa-iachr-final-report

International Commission Finds United States Denied Justice to Domestic Violence Survivor http://www.aclu.org/womens-rights/international-commission-finds-united-states-denied-justice-domestic-violence-survivor

Amplify’d from www.aclu.org

My name is Jessica Lenahan and I am a survivor of domestic violence and an advocate for battered women and children. Six years ago, I turned to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), an international tribunal responsible for promoting and protecting human rights throughout the Americas, because the justice system in the United States had abandoned me. Today, IACHR issued a landmark decision in my case that found that the United States violated my human rights and those of my three children, Rebecca, Katheryn, and Leslie.

In 1999, my estranged husband, Simon Gonzales, kidnapped Rebecca, Katheryn, and Leslie in violation of a domestic violence restraining order I had obtained against him. I repeatedly contacted and pled with the Castle Rock Police in Colorado for assistance, but they refused to act. Instead, over a 10-hour period, the police responded to a fire-lane violation, looked for a lost dog and took a two-hour dinner break. Late that night, Simon arrived at the police station and opened fire. He was killed and the bodies of my three girls were found in the back of his truck. No investigation ever took place to determine the cause, time and place of my children’s death.

I sued the town of Castle Rock for failing to enforce the restraining order I held against my husband. My case went all the way to the Supreme Court, but they ruled that the enforcement of a restraining order wasn’t mandatory under Colorado law.

I felt utterly abandoned, but I wasn’t done fighting. Instead I turned to IACHR.

In a decision released today, the commission found that the U.S. is failing in its legal obligation to protect women and children from domestic violence, and makes clear that the U.S. government has a duty to protect domestic violence victims by taking steps to ensure their safety, including the enforcement of restraining orders. It also requires that the U.S. examine how it fails domestic violence victims and ensure that victims of domestic violence receive adequate protection from their abusers.

But this decision isn’t just about me.

In the United States, an estimated 1.3 million women are victims of physical assault by an intimate partner each year, and every day more than three women are killed by their intimate partners. These statistics reveal that domestic violence amounts to nothing less than an epidemic and the failure of police to enforce the law directly contributes to this epidemic. A 911 call to the police must mean something and the police can’t ignore multiple emergency calls throughout the course of the night as they did in my case.

I did everything I was supposed to do on that fateful night to protect and save my daughters. I even would have tried to rescue them myself had I known the police would do nothing to find them or to enforce my restraining order. We respect our laws because we believe they embody our government’s commitment to protecting our lives and the lives of our children. Unfortunately, I had to lose everything to realize that we are often not guaranteed basic protections from our government unless we demand them.

The IACHR decision can stimulate necessary changes in U.S. law and policy, if the U.S. government takes IACHR’s assessment of law enforcement’s failings seriously and implements its recommendations.

I hope my case will serve as an important precedent that other women can rely on when they find themselves in a similar situation where the police refuse to enforce a restraining order. I urge you to rely on it to speak out on the issue of domestic violence and to make sure that our government hears you.

You can learn more about the IACHR report, as well as my case and the process that led to my petition to the IACHR, here, here and here. Read more at www.aclu.org

 

See this Amp at http://bit.ly/nPT9aF

No Way Out But One

Amplify’d from www.nowayoutbutone.com

THE PROJECT: No Way Out But One is a feature length documentary currently in post-production. It tells the story of an American woman accused of kidnapping her own children, a woman who fled the country and became the first American to be granted asylum by the government of the Netherlands on grounds of domestic violence. The 13-minute version presented here serves as a trailer for the feature and a documentary short. Read more here THE STORY: In 1994 Holly Collins became an international fugitive when she took her three children and fled the United States to protect them from abuse. The family courts had ignored medical evidence of domestic violence and gave full custody of Holly’s children to the man they named as their abuser – her ex-husband and the children’s father. Wanted by the FBI, Holly became the first U.S. Citizen to receive asylum from the Netherlands. Read more here. THE LARGER PICTURE: In No Way Out But One, Holly Collins shares a story that in many respects is like thousands of others. It is estimated that 58,000 children a year are ordered into unsupervised contact with physically or sexually abusive parents following divorce in the United States. Read more here. IN THE END: Unlike so many of the other tragic stories happening around the country, Holly was able to protect her children and keep them safe. Despite all the harrowing trials, her story ultimately has a happy ending. Even though she and the kids had No Way Out But One.

See more at www.nowayoutbutone.com

 

See this Amp at http://bit.ly/nob2o7

Why The U.S. Should NOT Sign the CRC

Amplify’d from parentingnewsnetwork.com

The United States stands alone among industrialized countries in the western world as well as many others in the third world, in having not signed onto the United Nations’s “Convention on the Rights of the Child” (CRC). This is as it should be. While on an unconsidered read, the idea of proclaiming the human rights of the child would seem to be unassailable, and the CRC’s language may read to the non-legally-trained eye as laudable, the United States should NOT sign on to this document.

Here are just some of the reasons:

– This document is a treaty, a law. And as a prospective law, it is not at all well-worded. Laws that are vague, overbroad, and not well-worded are dangerous. They can give rise to unintended interpretations and outcomes. Given the powerful status of the United States in the world, and also the delight with which other countries might enjoy claiming a violation of a treaty by the United States, this makes an ill-worded law extremely problematic.

– Article 1 of the treaty specifically permits variation in the laws setting forth the “age of majority”, specifically in instances in which the age of majority is attained earlier than age eighteen. While such variation is necessary and will occur, the United States cannot enter into a treaty effectively endorsing the laws of countries in which the age of majority for some purposes is set so low that young children may be married, forced to cease school and enter the labor market, or conscripted into the army.

Whether or not you agree with this or that critic, whether or not your politics falls to the left or right, liberal or conservative, you nevertheless need to appreciate that a badly worded law, open as it is to the multiple interpretations and meanings ascribed to it by others — such as the consensus of opinions by “democratic” vote of representatives of other countries whose religious, cultural, and moral beliefs regarding what is appropriate for children may be wildly adverse to yours — is a dangerous and ill-advised thing. The United States must not endorse any compact, contract, or treaty in derogation of the Constitution of the United States and its Bill of Rights. To learn more about the U.S. Constitution, see the Legal Information Institute at Cornell University at http://topics.law.cornell.edu/constitution/overview Read more at parentingnewsnetwork.com

 

See this Amp at http://bit.ly/jDtJ1S