2013-2014 WCADV Legislative Agenda

Wisconsin Coalition
Against Domestic Violence
2013-2014 Legislative Agenda
The Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence (WCADV), founded in 1978, is the
statewide membership organization representing Wisconsin domestic abuse programs,
domestic violence victims, survivors of domestic abuse and their children, and concerned
individuals. WCADV’s mission is to end domestic violence. Through education and advocacy,
we strive to change societal attitudes, practices and policies that adversely affect victims from
diverse groups and their children.
WCADV is committed to legislative efforts which are proactive and focused on the women,
children and men who have been victims of domestic violence. WCADV is guided by core
principles:
•
•
•
•
Respecting the individual autonomy of survivors
Ensuring accountability for perpetrators
Providing safety and justice for victims
Promoting the social change necessary to end domestic violence
In determining what legislative efforts to support, WCADV consults regularly with domestic
violence programs, survivors of domestic violence, coordinated community response teams,
and other professionals who work to address domestic violence. WCADV also maintains a
Policy Development Committee. The Committee identifies policy deficits, studies legislative
proposals and ensures that WCADV’s advocacy benefits survivors across the state.
The 2013-2014 WCADV Legislative Agenda is a work in progress. We encourage legislators,
local domestic violence programs, survivors and other professionals to contact us with potential
legislative initiatives and to participate in lobbying efforts throughout the session.
In 2013-2014, we present the following legislative initiatives as our agenda.
Overview
With numerous recent high-profile
profile domestic violence homicides
homicides,, many in Wisconsin are asking
how the state can better support and protect vi
victims. As a state policymaker, we
e welcome your
leadership in this effort. The Wisconsin Coalition Against Domestic Violence (WCADV) is the
statewide voice for local domestic violence shelters, service providers, victims and survivors.
We believe significantt improvement to the state’s response requires strategic investment in
resources, refinement of existing laws and the fostering prevention efforts throughout
Wisconsin.
DV incidents reported
to police in WI in 2011:
28,539
Daily unmet requests
for help due to lack of
resources
270
WI women assaulted,
raped or stalked by an
intimate partner:
714,000
Average number of
days between DV
deaths in WI, 2000-11
11
7.5
Victims & children
turned away from WI
DV shelters in 2012
Increase in victim
contacts, WI shelters
& programs 2009-12
12
2,388
79%
Annual health care
costs of violence
against women in US
Return on $1 invested
in preventing DV
$5.9 billon
$9.25
Resources
Support Local Domestic Violence Shelters
and Service Providers Accross Wisconsin
Each year, approximately 40,000 women, children and men receive servic
services
es from Wisconsin
domestic violence victim service providers. Victim services are effective at saving lives, reducing
violence and lowering costs associated with abuse. Economic analysis shows for every dollar
invested in victim services, $9.25 is saved in property losses, medical and mental healthcare
expenses, police response, lost productivity and other costs.1
The Governor’s budget includes specific initiatives to address domestic violence.
•
•
•
A new GPS grant program funded at 3 million dollars over the biennium that will provide
enhanced monitoring in some Wisconsin counties.
Capital funding for the Family Justice Center in Milwaukee
Capital funding for the a domestic abuse shelter in Madison
We fully support these initiatives and commend Governor Walker for prioritizing the needs of
domestic violence victims. We urge the Legislature to support the proposals.
The Legislature should also support domestic
violence victim services throughout Wisconsin
W
because domestic violence is a statewide
issue. Victims in rural areas,, in particular, rely
more heavily on government funded services
because there are less additional resources in
their communities. Over 80% of victims are
sheltered in rural counties,
nties, and the great majority of domestic violence incidents and homicides
occur in counties with population
populations under 400,000 people.
Each day, about 270 requests for help
from victims of domestic violence go
unmet because of a lack of resources.
Currently, programs do not have the
staff or funding to meet all of the need.
Domestic violence victim shelters and service providers throughout Wisconsin are stretched to
the limit. State funding for victim service has remained stagnant, and other sources of funding
have decreased. From 2011 to 2012, our data indicate the operating budgets of victim programs
decreased 5%, leading to a loss of about 20 full
full-time
time advocate positions. Meanwhile from 2009
to
o 2012, the number of nights victims needed to spend in shelter and the numbers of adult and
child victim services have dramatically increased. For example, in that time period, the number
of adult victim contacts grew almost 80%. The most common reasons ffor
or the increases are
more severe, complicated and time
time-consuming
consuming cases and the use of evidence-based,
evidence
traumainformed care service delivery models, which require more intensive support. With cuts at the
federal level likely, Wisconsin is sure to see signif
significant
icant erosion to the statewide response to
domestic violence victims unless the Legislature shores up services throughout the state.
1
Clark K. Andersen et al, A Cost-Benefit
Benefit Analysis of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994, 8 Violence Against Women 417
(2002).
Restore Funding for Civil Legal Services in Family Law
and Other Cases
• Wisconsin is the only state in the Midwest providing no funding for
general civil legal services.
One of the main reasons victims of domestic violence stay with abusive partne
partners
rs is the fear they
will not be able to protect their children during and after the separation. The prospect of going
against their abusers in child custody and placement action
actions is
s daunting and weighs heavily on
victims. Abusers use the family law process to continue to control their victims; research shows
violent parents contest custody at a higher rate than non-abusive parents.
Our member programs report recent cuts to state funding for civil legal services have made it
more difficult for victims to achieve
ieve true and lasting safety. Without legal representation, victims
are not able to assertt their rights and utilize current protections for victims and children. When
victims face abusers alone in civil court, they are at an inherent disadvantage and just and safe
outcomes are unlikely. We request state funding for these crucial services be restored.
Fund the prosecutor retention plan
•In
In Dane and Milwaukee counties, which collectively handle
approximately 11,600 domestic violence cases per year, 50% of
ADAs have less than 5 years experience.
Wisconsin’s criminal justice system is failing victims of domestic violence. Victims deserve
trained and experienced prosecutors to handle their cases and to bring violent perpetrators to
justice. Yet, turnover is remarkably high for A
Assistant District Attorneys (ADAs)—
—two to three
times higher than the average state employee. The lack of experienced ADAs is creating a
bottleneck in the criminal justice syste
system that threatens the ability of the entire system to be a
source of protection for victims.
Successful resolution of domestic violence cases requires experienced prosecutors. Given its
prevalence, domestic violence cases represent a significant portion of the workload in
Wisconsin DA offices. At the same time
time, these cases are incredibly complex and consequential;
prosecutors must understand
d and be able to use sophisticated trial strategies to account for
volatile victim and perpetrator dynamics. Perpetrators and defense attorneys know the state’s
attorneys are unable to fully and successfully prosecute many domestic violence cases through
t
trial. As a result, many abusers are able to plea to less serious charges, and they escape any
significant accountability.
Last session, the Legislature
egislature cre
created a pay progression plan to give DAs
s the ability to retain
quality and experienced ADAs. Victims literally risk their lives when they come forward to report
abuse. We believe funding the
e pay progression pla
plan is essential to ensuring victims can depend
on qualified prosecutors capable of keeping them safe and bringing perpetrators
ators to justice.
Stabliize Sexual Assault Victim Services Funding
• Funding for sexual assault victim services was 27.5%
lower in 2012 than in 2011.
Domestic violence and sexual assault are overlapping crimes. One in ten women reports
report being
raped by an intimate partner, and 17% of women have experienced some other form of sexual
violence by a partner. Thus, a significant por
portion
tion of sexual assaults are acts of domestic abuse.
abuse
Reflecting this connection, the majority of domestic violence victim service providers also
provide sexual assault victim services. Shortfalls to the Sexual Assault Victim Services
Se
(SAVS)
grant program, due to declining Victim
Victim-Witness Surcharge revenue, have compromised the
ability of service providers to respond to both victims of domestic and sexual violence. The
Attorney General has proposed using the P
Penalty Surcharge
ge to stabilize the SAVS fund. We
support stabilizing the fund because consistent funding is necessary for Wisconsin to
adequately address both domest
domestic violence and sexual assault.
Fill the Gap in BadgerCare
• Access to health care is critical to victims rebuilding
their lives and realizing their potential.
Wisconsin has the opportunity to enroll all childless adults below 138 FPL in BadgerCare,
BadgerCare with
the federal government covering the vast majority of the cost. In the first years of the program, it
is likely the federal government will pay 100 percent of the cost for this population.
population Covering
Wisconsinites will increase the number of domestic violence victims who are able to transition to
self-sufficient, stable and healthy lives.
Heath care services are often nec
necessary
essary for victims to rebuild their lives. While domestic
violence affects families from all socio
socio-economic
economic backgrounds, poor families face more barriers
to successfully dealing with domestic violence
violence.. Domestic violence erodes victims’ economic
independence. Abusers often sabotage victims’ ability to maintain steady employment and
income.. Moreover, years of abuse and trauma prevent victims from realizing their full potential.
Research shows that comprehensively addressing the effects of trauma, especially through
t
mental health treatment, is an effective way to return victims to independence, better health and
productivity. However, low-income
income victims without children or victims who have lost custody of
their children during the separation process often lack any kind of reliable access to the health
care they need to begin anew. As a result, some victims simply remain stuck in harmful cycles.
In addition, covering Wisconsinites will lower the risk to victims because more perpetrators will
have access to mental health care and alcohol and drug treatment. Mental illness and chemical
dependencies are rarely themselves causes of domestic violence; however, these conditions
are significant contributing factors and increase the risk of more severe and lethal violence.
violence We
believe Wisconsin should not pass up the opportunity to better address these problems.
Allow evidence of abusers' pattern of
violence in criminal trials
• Other states: Michigan, Minnesota, Kansas, Vermont
One of the main challenges to prosecuting domestic violence is that the rules of evidence
prohibit judges and juries from learning of perpetrator’s pattern of terror
ror and coercive control.
control
Defense attorneys understand juries are likel
likely to never know about the full campaign of violence
and abuse, and therefore, defendants have the advantage at trial or in plea negotiations. As a
result, many repeat and dangerous abusers face only minimal accountability
accountability.
Recognizing this inherent problem, a number of states have amended their rules of evidence to
allow prosecutors to present
nt a fuller picture of the domestic violence to judges and juries. Five
states, including our neighbors, Michigan and Minnesota, have amended their rules of evidence
to admit evidence of prior acts of domestic violence during prosecutions. The high courts of
Kansas and Vermont have developed similar policies through case law. Wisconsin’s rules of
evidence should likewise be amended to bring the true nature of domestic violence out from the
shadows and into the light of our sta
state’s courtrooms.
Create Mandatory Arrest Compliance Measures and
Require Ongoing Training
• Other states: Connecticut, Georgia, Indiana, Kentucky, Rhode Island,
South Dakota and Texas require ongoing DV training for officers.
Recent reports about the Brown Deer Police Department’s failure to arrest the perpetrator of the
Brookfield shootings raise questions about compliance with Wis
Wisconsin’s
consin’s mandatory arrest law.
Anecdotal evidence suggests non
non-compliance is not unique to any one department.
departme Under
current law, each law enforcement department must create and implement a domestic abuse
arrest policy. There are currently no oversight or reporting requirements. Additionally,
Additio
current
law requires new police officers receive ttraining on domestic abuse; however, there are no
ongoing training requirements.. We propose compliance measures, like having departments
submit domestic abuse policies to the state and requiring
iring domestic abuse continuing education
for officers.
Offering New Beginnings to Human Trafficking Victims
• A number of other states provide a mechaism for human trafficking
victims to vacate convictions that were the result of their victimization.
Law enforcement officials are increasingly recognizing that women and children who were
previously prosecuted for prostitution are in fact victims of sex trafficking. The presence of a
conviction on the record of a trafficking victim perpetuates the victimization as a continuing
source of stigma and a significant
ant barrier to obtaining a job and housing and to leading a
productive life. We support legislation to allow courts to vacate the convictions of trafficking
victims who show they committed the crimes as a result of being forced or coerced by a human
trafficker. We also support legislation to prevent victims of child sex trafficking from
inappropriately being treated by the criminal justice system as offenders rather than victims.
Enforcement of the Current Firearms Surrender
Requirement for Abusers
• Restricting abusers' with restraining orders access to guns decreases
domestic violence homicides by approximately 10%.
Current law requires abusers surrender their ffirearms
irearms if a domestic abuse or child abuse
restraining order is issued against them. This safety measure remains of limited effectiveness
because there is no statewide requirement that courts verify abusers’ compliance with the
surrender order. A judicial enforcement procedure was recently piloted in four counties and
subsequently approved by the chief jjudges
udges as a best practice. The procedure requires
verification of surrender when the abu
abuser is known to possess a gun. If surrender cannot be
verified, an additional hearing is required to ensure the abuser has complied with the law.
We believe these procedures should be required statewide. The abusers’ possession of a
firearm exponentially increases the ch
chances a victim will be killed. Restricting abusers’
abusers with
restraining orders access to guns decreases domestic violence homicides by approximately
10%.2 Implementing this procedure is a commonsense way to help keep guns out of the hands
of abusers and keep victims alive
alive.
Protect Wisconsinites from Out of State
Abuse, Stalking and Harassment
• Other states: Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Washington
Restraining orders are often practically unavailable for individuals who are being abused and
harassed by perpetrators who live out of state or for victims who flee to Wisconsin to escape
abuse that occurred elsewhere.. With the advance of technology, victims are now exposed to
abusive behavior through
gh phone calls, text messages, email and social media. Wisconsin’s civil
jurisdiction laws, which apply to
o restraining order cases
cases, were not designed to respond
res
to this
type of conduct. As a result, victims are often told they must go to the abuser’s home state to
get a valid restraining order.. Doing so may very well be unsafe or practically impossible.
WCADV supports narrowly crafted modifications to Wisconsin’s jurisdictional statutes so that
tha
victims may apply for domestic abuse, ch
child
ild abuse and harassment restraining orders against
out of state perpetrators who direct abuse at Wisconsinites or have caused victims to flee to
Wisconsin.
2
Vigdor ER, Mercy JA. Do laws restricting access to firearms by domestic violence offenders prevent intimate partner homicide?,
homicide?
Evaluation Review 2006;30:313-46.
Improve Wisconsin's Restraining Order Laws
•A
A number of technical changes and other refinements would
also make restraining orders more effective for victims
There
here are four types of restraining orders
orders: domestic abuse, child abuse, individual-at-risk
individual
and
harassment. Victims of domestic violence utilize all four types of restraining order depending on
the facts and circumstances of the abuse
abuse. Although restraining orders do not shield victims from
violence in very high-risk situations
situations,, research shows restraining orders are effective at reducing
or eliminating violence in the majority of cases.
Technical Changes and Refinements
• Stalking behavior should be a basis for obtaining a domestic abuse restraining order.
or
Stalking is a significant indicator of danger but is currently not included in the definition of
domestic abuse for the purpose of obtaining a domestic abuse restraining order.
• The statute should provide that harassment retraining orders may prohibit all contact
between the victim and perpetrator. Currently, the law only specifically bars harassing
contact, which invites abusers to push the limits of order and leads to enforcement
problems.
• Similar to other hearings related to children, child abuse restraining order hearings
hearing
should be closed and the
he records sealed to protect minor victims. Some counties have
already adopted this practice.
• Child victims and non-offending
offending parents should not be required to pay guardian ad litem
fees in restraining order cases. Charging child victims ((or their non-offending
offending parent)
these fees likely violates ffederal funding conditions and is an unjust barrier to safety for
child victims.
• Under current law, either party may request a new (de novo) hearing before a circuit
c
court judge if the restraining order was issued or denied by a court commissioner. The
statute should clearly state that any restraining order issued by a court commissioner is
valid until the new hearing is held.
• In certain situations, a victim m
may request an automatic extension of a restraining order.
Current law requires the victim to notify the perpetrator of the extension. The statute
should be amended to direct clerks of court to make the notification in order to limit the
perpetrator’s ability
ity to have contact with or locate the victim.
• Current law provides a method for victims requesting a domestic abuse or harassment
restraining order to submit their address confidentially. This allows them to receive
necessary notices from the court but re
remain
main safe from the abuser. This procedure
should also be used in child abuse and individual
individual-at-risk
risk restraining orders.
• Under current law, the court must rule on the final restraining order 14 days after the
issuance of a temporary restraining order. Some judges will keep the
e temporary order in
effect long-term
term in lieu of ruling on the final order. This practice shou
should
ld be specifically
prohibited.