Note:
About the only thing that I see wrong with the below after a cursury reading is that it should state something like virtually no men were given benefits since a few, have been told that they can't stay there at the shelter(s) because you are a man, but we are not biased....so here's some literature...
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE jULY 5, 2005
###########################################
Analysis of the Violence Against Women Act
The US Senate and House of Representatives are currently debating
the Violence Against Women Act. RADAR has identified 12 serious
flaws with the proposed bill:
1. Abuses the truth. A recent VAWA-funded report documented
that 1.5% of women and 0.9% of men were physically or sexually
assaulted by a partner in the previous year. The report further
notes that one-fifth of these men – as well as two-fifths of the
women -- were injured as a result of the assault. But VAWA simply
ignores the facts about domestic violence. [Extent, Nature, and
Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence,
www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/nij/181867.pdf , p. iii-iv]
2. Blatantly discriminates against men. The title, findings,
and programs of VAWA violate men's constitutional right to equal
protection under the Fourteenth Amendment. None of the billions of
VAWA dollars have been spent to help heterosexual male victims of
DV. Imagine a federal law designed to protect white victims from
criminal acts, while ignoring black victims.
3. Takes children away from their fathers. VAWA allows women to
make false allegations of domestic violence, and then petition for
divorce and custody of the children. In some states, a father who
has ever had a restraining order filed against him is automatically
rendered ineligible for joint custody of his children.
4. Blurs the distinction between violent crime and a verbal
argument. The National Research Council notes that "Rigorous inquiry
into violence against women is precluded when scholars fail to
distinguish among what constitutes an act of violence, abuse, or
battering." [Advancing the Federal Research Agenda on Violence
Against Women, http://books.nap.edu/catalog/10849.html , p. 26]
5. Allows unrestrained use of restraining orders. Judges
typically issue restraining orders based only on the word of the
woman, without obtaining hard evidence or even allowing the man to
present his side of the story. And many state laws define "violence"
so broadly as to allow restraining orders to be issued on the
flimsiest pretext.
6. Provides perverse incentives for law enforcement agencies
and prosecutors. VAWA encourages local authorities to implement
policies for mandatory reporting, mandatory arrest, and "no-drop"
prosecutions. A Feminist Majority Foundation report recommends that
domestic violence programs should abandon such rigid and unfair
practices because they often end up harming families [Safety &
Justice for All: Examining the Relationship between the Women's Anti-
Violence Movement and the Criminal Legal System
http://www.ms.foundation.org/user-
assets/PDF/Program/safety_justice.pdf , pp. 12-16]
7. Pre-empts existing law enforcement programs. States
currently have strong partner assault laws. And the federal Violence
of Crime Act already addresses the issue of domestic violence. VAWA
spends $1 billion a year to duplicate existing programs.
8. Politicizes the judiciary. VAWA provides funding for
judicial education which in practice amounts to ideologically-loaded
rants. At one such training session judges were instructed: "Your
job is not to become concerned about all the constitutional rights
of the man that you're violating as you grant a restraining order.
Thrown him out on the street, give him the clothes on his back and
tell him, `See ya' around.'" [http://www.ejfi.org/DV/dv-10.htm]
9. Funds ideologically-based treatment programs. The National
Academy of Sciences recently concluded that domestic violence
programs are frequently "driven by ideology and stakeholder
interests rather than by plausible theories and scientific evidence
of cause." [Advancing the Federal Research Agenda on Violence
Against Women, http://books.nap.edu/catalog/10849.html , p. 6]
10. Represents an over-reaching of federal power. VAWA
represents unwarranted government interference into the personal
relationships of intimate partners. Furthermore, the Supreme Court
has condemned parts of VAWA as representing federal intrusion into
an area of law that falls squarely within the domain of the states
(United States v. Morrison, 2000).
[http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/1261/]
11. Corrupts family violence research. VAWA-funded researchers
often seek to bias the outcome of their research by interviewing
only women, by slanting the wording of questions, or by selectively
reporting research findings. [The Controversy over Domestic Violence
by Women: A Methodological, Theoretical, and Sociology of Science
Analysis. http://www.menweb.org/straus21.htm]
12. Unfairly stereotypes men. VAWA funds educational programs
that consistently depict men as perpetrators and women as victims of
domestic violence. Most educational programs refer to the
perpetrator as "him" and the victim as "her."
VAWA tramples on persons' basic human rights, undermines the family,
and makes a mockery of fairness and justice. Our elected officials
have a responsibility to make sure VAWA helps all victims of
domestic violence.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
RADAR (Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting)is a
coalition of men and women concerned about bias in
domestic violence reporting and laws. For more information,
visit www.mediaradar.org.
###################################
--------------------
Equality is not a difficult concept
|
Previous
Index
Next
Flat
Analysis of the VAWA
Edit
Reply
Quote
