The War on Violence: Improving the Response to Domestic Violence in the Military

BY JUDGE PETER C. MACDONALD AND DEBORAH D. TUCKER

ABSTRACT The Department of Defense has taken steps in recent years to improve out- comes for victims of domestic violence who reside on military installations. In Fiscal Year 2001, more History of the In 2000, the Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence was established, a than 18,000 incidents of Defense Task Ispouse abuse were reported military-civilian group of experts charged with improving the military’s Force on to Military effectiveness in addressing domestic violence in the Armed Forces in a vari- Domestic Violence authorities.1 This represents ety of areas including offender accountability, coordination between mili- In 1998, a highly publi- up to five times the rate of tary and civilian communities, and changing the military climate around cized cluster of domestic marital aggression in the domestic violence. This article will provide an overview of the Task Force, homicides occurred at Fort 2 civilian community. Yet,rel- its work during the past three years, and its recommendations. Campbell, Ky., a U.S. Army atively few military person- post. On Jan. 17, 1999, 60 nel are prosecuted or administratively sanctioned on Minutes, the CBS News magazine, aired a highly critical charges stemming from domestic violence.3 Until report of the military’s response to domestic violence. recently, the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) has This report, entitled “The War at Home,” increased pres- made little progress or effort to confront the problem sure on Congressional members to investigate the nature and deal with domestic violence involving military per- and extent of domestic violence within the military and sonnel. Confronted with highly publicized instances of to take necessary steps to reduce the violence. Several domestic violence, the DoD formed a multidisciplinary national domestic violence groups diligently advocated Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence (DTFDV) in for the establishment of an entity to investigate domestic April 2000 to investigate the protocol surrounding violence within the military.As a result, Congress, led by domestic violence and to recommend changes. The Senator Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), mandated the work done in the past three years by the DoD’s DTFDV establishment of the DTFDV in October 1999 as part of takes an important first step in the war on domestic the Congressional authorization for expenditures for the violence in the military. This article highlights the military in 2000. recommendations made by the DTFDV and the process As a result of the passage of the National Defense leading up to them. Authorization Act (Pub. Law 106-65, Section 591),

Judge Peter C. Macdonald is a retired District Court Judge in the Commonwealth of Kentucky. Judge Macdonald served a three-year term as mem- ber of the Department of Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence, appointed by Secretary of Defense William Cohen. Judge Macdonald is a member of the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges’ Board of Trustees.

Deborah D. Tucker, M.A., co-chair of the Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence, is a co-founder of the National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence. Ms. Tucker served as the Founding Chair of the National Network to End Domestic Violence during its development and passage of the Violence Against Women Act, and is a recent recipient of the Marshall’s Domestic Violence Peace Prize.

Fall 2003 • Juvenile and Family Court Journal 121 The War on Violence

Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen convened the 24- offender.These practices have proved to be ineffective in member DTFDV in April 2000. The DTFDV was com- dealing with domestic violence. prised of members from the Departments of Defense, Justice, and Health and Human Services, as well as highly Summary of Recommendations regarded private-sector experts in domestic violence, Over the course of its three years, the DTFDV made including judges, advocates, law enforcement officers, more than 200 recommendations to the Secretary of and survivors of domestic violence in the military. [See Defense in its Annual Reports.9 Listed below are nine Appendix A for a complete listing of DTFDV members key points summarizing these recommendations. and staff.] On April 24, 2003, the DTFDV completed its three-year mandate, having made more than 200 recom- Create a culture shift that: mendations to the Secretary of Defense and to the • Does not tolerate domestic violence, .4 • Moves from victims holding offenders account- able to the system holding offenders account- Challenges Facing the DTFDV able, and Contrary to public perception, the military is not • Punishes criminal behavior; one monolithic structure. The DTFDV members identi- Establish a victim advocate program with provisions fied a limitation in the military’s response to for nondisclosure; domestic violence: Each branch responds differently and Implement the Proposed Intervention Process each installation, of which there are more than 300 Model [see Appendix B]; around the world,may well respond differently than stat- Replace the Case Review Committee (CRC) with ed policy. One of the goals of the DTFDV’s work was to the Domestic Violence Assessment and Intervention establish a consistent standard of response by adopting Team (DVAIT); models and philosophical underpinnings across all Enhance system and command accountability and branches of service. include fatality review process; In 1999, 81% of all military personnel (in all four Implement DoD-wide training and prevention military branches) were stationed in the U.S. at any given programs; time—and 60% of those resided off the military installa- Hold offenders accountable; 5 tions. Because military housing is severely limited, the Strengthen local military and civilian community majority of personnel make their homes in local commu- collaboration; and nities.6 Therefore, many, if not most, of the military Evaluate results of domestic violence prevention domestic violence incidents occur in the civilian com- and intervention efforts. munity. These cases are responded to by civilian law enforcement agencies and may be heard in civilian Strategic Plan courts. It is also important to know that domestic An important component of the DTFDV’s recom- violence services currently provided by the military are mendations was the long-term strategic plan by which only available to victims of domestic violence if either the the DoD may more effectively address matters relating to victim or the perpetrator is a member of the military and domestic violence within the military. The proposed if they are married.7 As a result, domestic violence cases plan includes four parts: involving a military member who is in a dating or cohab- itating relationship may only be addressed by organiza- 1) The Key Points from the DTFDV Reports (listed tions in the civilian community.8 above) Historically, the military approach has been one of “under the table” and “keep it quiet” when it came to 2) The Domestic Violence Intervention Process Model dealing with service members who committed violent [see Appendix B] acts.In some communities,the modus operandi has been 3) Core Principles of Domestic Violence Intervention to avoid the criminal justice process by calling the (see below) commanding officer of the soldier, sailor, airman, or 4) Domestic Violence Prevention Conceptual Model marine, and requesting that the officer pick up the [see Appendix C]

122 Juvenile and Family Court Journal • Fall 2003 Judge Peter C. Macdonald and Deborah D. Tucker

Domestic Violence Intervention Process Model has a duty to protect the victims and take appropriate The Domestic Violence Intervention Process Model action to hold offenders accountable. Because the [see Appendix B] shows the interrelationships between military services will be implementing the recommen- the various elements of the military community that are dations, the DTFDV anticipated that challenges and involved in responding to an incident of domestic vio- variance from the original thoughts would occur in the lence. It is not intended to be a flow chart. It is intended “real world.”The Core Principles ask that, for each pro- to be an optimal guideline for responding to domestic gram designed or individual action taken, the decision- violence and includes intervention points with victims, maker be able to describe how the actions are consistent military commanders, and offenders. One limitation of with these principles.To ensure maximum effectiveness, the military’s current response to domestic violence that all intervention programs should consider the extent to the DTFDV identified was the inadequate criminal inves- which an action will adhere to these Core Principles:11 tigation of incidents and the command response to sub- stantiated cases. Lack of confidence, knowledge, and Respond to the needs of victims and provide for training of how to investigate criminal activity, particu- their safety; larly crimes against women, is pervasive throughout the Hold offenders accountable; military and gave rise to the DTFDV developing proto- Consider multi-cultural and cross-cultural factors; cols for an effective response. Consider the context of the violence and provide a The DTFDV believed that appropriate responses by measured response; victim advocates, military commanders, and law enforce- Consider military and civilian response; ment personnel were so critical that protocols were Involve victims in monitoring domestic violence developed for each of these responders that amplify the services; and steps outlined in this Intervention Process Model. Many Provide early intervention. lengthy discussions took place so that the full task force could understand just what impact each of the recom- Domestic Violence Prevention Conceptual Model mendations of the proposed protocols would have on The Domestic Violence Prevention Conceptual each other, and necessary changes were made. Model [see Appendix C] was developed by the DTFDV Additionally, the DTFDV determined that because the as a graphic representation of the continuum of risk, most effective method of preventing offenders from com- examples of target populations, and examples of possi- mitting subsequent acts of domestic violence was to hold ble tools to be used to prevent domestic violence. It is them appropriately accountable from the very beginning, not intended to be an all-inclusive list of tools, actions, a fourth protocol for offender intervention needed to be and programs to prevent domestic violence, but is pre- added. The protocols provide detailed suggestions for sented as a way for the DoD to begin thinking about and appropriate responses.(For complete details on these pro- organizing a concerted and focused effort to prevent tocols, visit the DTFDV Web site at: http://www.dtic.mil/ domestic violence.12 domesticviolence/).“The Domestic Violence Intervention Process Model will help ensure maximum safety for vic- Domestic Homicides at , tims, hold offenders appropriately accountable, and aid in North Carolina achieving the ultimate goal of eliminating domestic vio- The tragic domestic homicides at the U.S. Army post lence from military communities.”10 in Fort Bragg, N.C., in June and July of 2002 focused national attention on the DTFDV,reinforced the need for Core Principles of Domestic Violence Intervention its work, and created a sense of urgency for a more con- The DTFDV developed core principles it believed certed effort by the military to respond to victims of should guide all domestic violence intervention efforts. domestic violence and hold offenders accountable.That These principles were founded on the precept that summer,five domestic homicides occurred at Fort Bragg: every possible effort should be made to establish effec- tive programs to prevent domestic violence in the mili- June 11—Sgt. 1st Class Rigoberto Nieves shot and tary. However, if domestic violence does occur, the DoD killed his wife, Nancy, and then killed himself;

Fall 2003 • Juvenile and Family Court Journal 123 The War on Violence

June 29—Master Sgt.William Wright allegedly stran- For judges, this is a long-awaited recognition of gled his wife, Jennifer; their protective orders on military installations.To help July 9—Sgt. Cedric Ramon allegedly stabbed his facilitate this process and take advantage of the estranged wife, Marilyn, at least 50 times before law, judges should work with military commanders to setting her house on fire; establish a memorandum of understanding to ensure July 19—Sgt.1st Class Brandon Floyd shot and killed effective communication and to address the enforce- his wife and then killed himself; ment of their orders. July 23—Joan Shannon allegedly shot and killed her husband, Major David Shannon, while he slept.13 Fatality Reviews While the DTFDV addressed the issue of fatality In response to these homicides, the House Armed reviews in its first two reports,14 the homicides at Fort Services Committee conducted a hearing at Fort Bragg Bragg refocused attention on how they can be used to to identify problems with the military’s response to decrease the risks of future tragedies.The institution of domestic violence. On Dec. 2, 2002, Congress passed the fatality review teams,both in the Department of Defense Armed Forces Domestic Security Act making civilian and in each branch of the military,should prove to be an orders of protection valid on military installations. efficient means for periodically reviewing domestic vio- lence policies and case management practices. The Armed Forces Domestic Security Act The DTFDV recommended the use of both installa- The Armed Forces Domestic Security Act (HR 5590) tion- and DoD-wide fatality reviews and the involvement provides that a civilian order of protection shall have the of civilians, including judges, law enforcement person- same force and effect on a military installation as it does nel, and prosecutors in the process. Not only should within the jurisdiction of the court that issued the order. civilian representatives be involved in military fatality In addition, the Secretary of Defense is required to pre- reviews, military commanders should be comparably scribe regulations to carry out this modification. In involved in civilian fatality reviews, especially if the vic- essence, the Armed Forces Domestic Security Act tim and/or perpetrator were military members. Findings extends a form of full faith and credit to civilian orders from local installation fatality reviews should be for- of protection on military installations. At present, there warded to the DoD so that a military-wide examination is no charge for a violation of a protective order in the can be conducted to determine the effectiveness of DoD Uniform Code of Military Justice. Therefore, the extent policy, training, and implementation in the services and of on-installation power in this regard is to enforce the at local installations. provisions of the civilian order and turn the violation over to civilian authorities to prosecute. In contrast, mil- Coordinated Community Response itary orders of protection have not been granted full The DTFDV adopted the position that domestic faith and credit, or full force and effect on civilian land. violence is best dealt with by having a consistent, coor- Whether this is needed or not is still being debated. dinated community response. This approach clearly U.S. Representative Robin Hayes (R-N.C.) sponsored communicates to potential offenders, as well as to those the Armed Forces Domestic Security Act following the who have already offended,that domestic violence is not Congressional hearings at Fort Bragg in the summer of acceptable, will not be tolerated, and that there are 2002.The Act passed in record time: it made it through consequences for such behavior. This consistent, coor- both houses of Congress in the fall of 2002, gained dinated approach easily adapts to the philosophy of the President Bush’s signature in early December, and took military community’s current response, in which the immediate effect. long-standing Family Advocacy Programs (whose pur- This legislation closed a loophole that had prevent- pose is to respond to child abuse and domestic violence ed civilian court orders—such as a restraining order incidents) reach out to professionals on installations to against a batterer—from having any effect on domestic gather information and make recommendations to the military installations. Before this legislation, victims of military commanders.15 This approach will only be violence residing in military housing did not have access strengthened by using the Domestic Violence to a host of civilian legal tools. Intervention Process Model, the protocols, and involving

124 Juvenile and Family Court Journal • Fall 2003 Judge Peter C. Macdonald and Deborah D. Tucker

their counterpart agencies, including judges, from sur- effort to coordinate between local family and domestic rounding locales. In order to be most effective, however, violence courts and military installations. To this end, every element of the response system—from law Council President James Ray has established a Military enforcement to medical to command—must follow the Relations sub-committee of the Family Violence same protocol. It is important for everyone associated Committee.The sub-committee will also explore oppor- with the military to know what domestic violence is; the tunities for cross-training on domestic violence with dynamics of domestic violence [see Appendix D— installation commanders and Judge Advocates General Military Power and Control Wheel], including risk fac- (responsible for prosecuting offenders pursuant to the tors; the effects on victims and on children who witness Uniform Code of Military Justice and advising com- acts of domestic violence; and the consequences for manders on proper courses of action), and will seek the offenders. appointment of a military liaison to the committee. The DTFDV emphasized that collaborative efforts should be strengthened within the military, and also Summary of DTFDV among the military and the civilian communities that Initially, the DTFDV looked at the entire spectrum of surround military installations. The recommendations domestic violence issues, including not only the military’s included seeking Memoranda of Understanding with Family Advocacy Program, but also the roles of and local law enforcement agencies, shelters, court systems, responses from command, law enforcement, legal, and any other entities that can define specifically effec- medical, and faith communities.The DTFDV took a snap- tive communication and cooperation in responding to shot of what currently exists, in terms of domestic domestic violence cases.16 While it is important and violence policy at the DoD level as well as domestic beneficial to establish Memoranda of Understanding violence prevention and intervention practices at individ- between civilian agencies and military installations, ual installations. At the DTFDV’s initial meeting in April more active involvement by installation commanders in 2000, information gathering was identified as the first local coordinated community efforts is also advisable. In step. The DTFDV then ranked the areas of concern and communities with military installations nearby, existing organized four standing workgroups: Community domestic violence councils (or similar entities), should Collaboration, Education and Training, Offender invite the installation commander to participate in these Accountability, and Victim Safety. Ad hoc workgroups efforts, facilitating communications, increasing training, focused on special interest items such as defining domes- and improving responses in handling domestic violence tic violence (the military still does not have a definition) victims and offenders. and confidentiality. Currently, the military does not recog- A new project to improve coordination between nize confidentiality;any act of domestic violence is report- civilian and military communities that is already under- ed to command, regardless of the victim’s wishes. One of way is the military law enforcement Domestic Violence the DTFDV’s recommendations is adopting a policy of Train-the-Trainer Program. Working with the Federal limited nondisclosure for victim advocates. Law Enforcement Training Center and the National During its three years,the DTFDV met 15 times,with Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence, the DoD’s the workgroups meeting more frequently. During the Family Policy Office is conducting train-the-trainer pro- first year, the DTFDV made site visits to installations rep- grams across the country. These trainings involve mili- resenting each of the branches of the military in the con- tary and civilian prosecutors, law enforcement officers, tinental United States. In the second year, site visits were and advocates, and are geared to improving response, also made to military installations in the European the- investigation, and coordination in domestic violence ater of operations (Germany and Italy) and the Pacific cases. Trainings have already been conducted in Fort theater of operations (Hawaii, Japan, and Korea). Bragg, N.C., and Kings Bay Naval Station, Fla.Three addi- During the site visits, the DTFDV met with repre- tional trainings are scheduled for San Diego, Seattle, and sentatives of the military,including law enforcement, the Honolulu, by invitation of the host installations. More Judge Advocate General’s office, victims, medical person- trainings will be scheduled in the future. nel, commanders, senior enlisted members, and many The National Council of Juvenile and Family Court more, including civilian employees who had some Judges is implementing plans to undertake a similar involvement with domestic violence in the military.

Fall 2003 • Juvenile and Family Court Journal 125 The War on Violence

Interviews were also conducted with corresponding cates and several other key point recommendations for entities from the civilian communities contiguous to the review and comment among the military services and installations such as law enforcement personnel, domes- eventual policy adoptions by the DoD. tic violence service providers, local prosecutors, and the The DTFDV understood that, in making more than judiciary. Prior to these interviews, participants were 200 specific recommendations, some of them would not told that the discussion was not for attribution, so they be implemented for various financial, institutional, and would be forthright and candid. even political reasons. The civilian members, especially, During the third year, the DTFDV developed proto- came to realize that,at some point,they had to trust in the cols and elements of the strategic plan. With the able military’s leadership and how the military operates.Word support of the excellent staff, the DTFDV began to think from the top in the military’s regimented and hierarchical into the future and urged the establishment of a core society has dramatic impact.The DTFDV’s military mem- group that could provide consistent leadership after the bers believe significant change will occur as awareness Task Force expired. Robert Stein, Executive Director of grows in the services and in the DoD.The DTFDV believes the DTFDV, had delayed his retirement to manage this that the implementation of a majority of the recommen- effort for DoD, and his contributions cannot be overly dations, at least those that involve the strategic plan, will praised. To continue the DoD’s efforts in this area, the prove to dramatically reduce the level of domestic vio- Office of Family Policy established an Implementation lence in the military. The means of combating domestic Team, tapping several DTFDV staff members and adding violence in the United States Armed Forces could very leadership from Michael Hoskins, who had worked well become a model for civilian communities to consid- closely with the DTFDV as the former Family Advocacy er as they too seek to end violence against women. Program Director for the U.S.Navy.With their help in the transition phase, we can expect that many of the recom- Growing out of the DTFDV’s recommendations, mendations will be given every consideration by DoD The Military Response to Domestic Violence: Tools and the military services. In addition, the DTFDV recom- for Civilian Advocates is a guide specifically mended that the DoD,“(w)ithin two years of receiving designed to help advocates support military vic- the final report, convene a small, independent group tims of domestic violence. It was written by Judith with a composition similar to the DTFDV to review, E. Beals, J.D., a member of the DTFDV, published assess and report implementation progress to the by the Battered Women’s Justice Project and is Secretary of Defense.”17 Already the Implementation available online at www.bwjp.org. Team has put forward the confidentiality policy for advo-

AUTHORS’ ADDRESSES:

Judge Peter C. Macdonald 316 James Lyn Drive Hopkinsville, KY 42240

Deborah D. Tucker, M.A. National Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence 7800 Shoal Creek Blvd., Suite 120-N Austin, TX 78757 http://www.ncdsv.org

126 Juvenile and Family Court Journal • Fall 2003 Judge Peter C. Macdonald and Deborah D. Tucker

APPENDIX A

DEFENSE TASK FORCE ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

For complete bios on each Task Force member visit: Rear Admiral Steven Horton (Ret.), Boeing Company, http://www.dtic.mil/domesticviolence/ Space and Communications Groups, Seal Beach, CA (former member) Co-Chairs Jackson Katz, President, MVP Strategies, Long Beach, CA Lieutenant General Garry L. Parks, USMC, Deputy Commander for Manpower and Reserve Affairs, Lieutenant General Jack Klimp, USMC (Ret.), Mount Headquarters, U.S. Marine Corps,, DC Kisco, NY (former co-chair) Deborah D.Tucker, Executive Director, National Center Ms. Jeanne E. Koss, Soldier and Family Readiness on Domestic and Sexual Violence,Austin,TX Program Manager,Army Community Services, Fort Carson, CO (former member) Members Michael P.LaRiviere, Police Department, Salem, MA Sgt. Louis J.Armijo, Police Department, Property Section,Albuquerque, NM (former member) Honorable Peter Macdonald, District Judge, 3rd Judicial District of the Commonwealth of Kentucky, Judith Beals, Consultant, , MA (formerly director Hopkinsville, KY of Jane Doe, Inc., the Massachusetts Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence) Beckie U. Masaki,Asian Women’s Shelter, San Francisco, CA Rear Admiral Annette E. Brown, USN, Commander, Navy Region Southeast, Jacksonville, FL John F.McEleny, Deputy Director, Naval Criminal Investigative Service,Washington, DC Jacquelyn C. Campbell, Ph.D., R.N., FAAN.,Anna D.Wolf Endowed Professor and Associate Dean for Faculty Sergeant Major Alford L. McMichael, USMC, Affairs, Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing, Sergeant Major of the Marine Corps,Washington, DC Baltimore, MD Captain James B. Norman, USN, Commanding Vickii P.Coffey, President,Vickii Coffey and Associates, Officer, Naval Legal Service Office, North Central, Inc., Olympia Fields, IL Washington, DC Brigadier General Joseph Composto, USMC, Catherine Pierce, Office on Violence Against Women, Commanding General, U.S. Marine Corps Base, U.S. Department of Justice,Washington, DC Quantico,VA William D. Riley,Administration for Children and Elizabeth T.Corliss, Federal Executive Institute, Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Charlottesville,VA Services,Washington, DC Brigadier General Jan D. Eakle, USAF,Vice Commander, Major General Thomas J. Romig, USA,The Judge Ogden Air Logistics Center, Hill Air Force Base, UT Advocate General, U.S.Army,Washington, DC Major General Thomas J. Fiscus, USAF, The Judge Lieutenant General Edward Soriano, Commanding Advocate General, U.S.Air Force,Washington, DC General, ,WA (former member) Reverend (Dr.) Marie M. Fortune, Center for Prevention Connie Sponsler-Garcia, Battered Women’s Justice of Sexual and Domestic Violence, Seattle,WA Project, Minneapolis, MN Mr. Casey G. Gwinn, City Attorney, San Diego, CA Major General Antonio M.Taguba, USA,Acting Director of the Army Staff,Washington, DC Brigadier General Leif H. Hendrickson, USMC, Office of the Deputy Commandant for Manpower and Reserve Major General Craig Whelden, Deputy Commanding Affairs, Quantico,VA General, U.S.Army Pacific, Fort Shafter, HI

Fall 2003 • Juvenile and Family Court Journal 127 The War on Violence

APPENDIX A (CONT.)

DEFENSE TASK FORCE ON DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

Staff Lieutenant Sarah Elizabeth Moore, USAF, Workgroup Leader Robert L. Stein, III, Executive Director Bernard R. Robinson, Management Support Officer Captain Glenna L.Tinney, USN, Deputy Executive Director Michael J. Shane, Senior Consultant Sergeant First Class Teresa Beauchamp, USA, Chief Master Sergeant Earl Taylor, USAF,Senior Enlisted Administrative Noncommissioned Officer Advisor and Assistant Workgroup Leader Valinda Bolton,Training Director, National Center on Lonnie Weiss,Weiss Consulting, Philadelphia, PA Domestic and Sexual Violence,Austin,TX (consultant) Joan M. Byrd,Administrative Assistant Major Michael Zeliff, USMC,Workgroup Leader Lieutenant Colonel James N. Jackson, USA,Workgroup Leader

128 Juvenile and Family Court Journal • Fall 2003 Judge Peter C. Macdonald and Deborah D. Tucker

APPENDIX B

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE INTERVENTION PROCESS MODEL

DV Incident Report may come from one/more sources (victim, FAP, chaplain, medical, civilian law enforcement, 3rd party, etc.) and may enter model through one/more protocol(s) below.

Victim Command Law Enforcement Advocate Protocol Protocol Protocol

Victim Command DVAIT Initial Command (Safety Related/ Immediate Assessment and Investigation Immediate Needs) Action Options Recommendations

Victim Offender Ongoing Victim Advocacy Services MPO, Action Options FAP • On Installation FAP Confine, etc.* Assessment • Off Installation Assessment and Clinical • Combination of On and Clinical Investigation and Services and Off Installation Services Information Gathering for Children

Command Individual Ongoing Decision and Advocacy Safety Planning Action*

Offender** System Assistance Advocacy with Resources

UCMJ Action/ Refer to FAP No UCMJ Action for Intervention

* Take into consideration information and assessment from FAP, law enforcement, SJA, victim advocate, medical, clergy, etc., as appropriate. Offender Admin Action/ ** Multiple options may be chosen and some/all actions may occur simultaneously. Intervention No Admin Action - - - Dotted line connotes transfer of information only if nondisclosure is waived. Protocol

Color Key

Victim Command Offender

Fall 2003 • Juvenile and Family Court Journal 129 The War on Violence

APPENDIX C

DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PREVENTION CONCEPTUAL MODEL

Toolkit*

Separate from Military and/or Disciplinary Action As Appropriate High Urgent Danger Assessment & Safety Planning Risk**

Risk & Danger Assessment Tertiary Prevention Moderate Safety Planning Risk** Victim Advocacy FAP Assessment Offender Intervention Program Administrative and/or Disciplinary Action As Appropriate Child Witness Program Low Risk** First Offense Programs

Groups at Risk Couples Counseling

Secondary Prevention Targeted Programs Substance Abuse ADM w/PTSD New Parent Support Couples with Problems Child Witnesses Child Witness Programs Child Abuse History Immigrant Spouses Health Care Screening Pregnant Women Controlling Spouses History of Violence Against Anyone

Command Climate of Non-Tolerance New Accession DV Training Public Service Campaigns Dating Violence Prevention Programs Everyone in DoD Middle & High Schools Health Care Screening Primary Prevention Education and Training New Parent Support

*Not all inclusive **Risk for reoccurrence and danger/lethality

130 Juvenile and Family Court Journal • Fall 2003 Judge Peter C. Macdonald and Deborah D. Tucker

APPENDIX D

MILITARY POWER AND CONTROL WHEEL

VIOLENCE l s ica ex ys ua ph l USING USING COERCION AND THREATS: INTIMIDATION: Telling her,“If you report me, you’ll Telling her you’re trained to kill and lose your income, base housing, the maim. Controlling her with stares, kids, be deported. Threatening looks, and gestures. Playing with her with firearms. Saying, or cleaning your weapons around her. Hurting “Do what I tell you or pets. Destroying USING EMOTIONAL I’ll get you.” her property. USING ISOLATION: ABUSE: Ignoring her when you Controlling access to her return from work or deployment. military I.D. card, family, friends, Trivializing her concerns. Telling her people information, base/command functions, think she’s crazy. Telling her she’s a bad wife, telephone, transportation, or English lessons. mother, lover. Putting her down publicly. Accusing Living off-base to lessen her contact with others. her of ruining your career. POWER AND USING CHILDREN: Refusing to help MINIMIZING, DENYING, AND CONTROL with the child(ren). Threatening to BLAMING: Saying she’s lying to “get” get custody. Telling the child(ren) she’s you. Claiming she provoked it by playing a bad mother. Getting the child(ren) around, getting drunk, not shutting up, to disrespect her. Threatening CLAIMING USING or not doing what you told her. to hurt the child(ren) MILITARY/ ECONOMIC Blaming the violence on if she doesn’t MALE PRIVILEGE: ABUSE: job stress or alcohol. comply. Using her dependent wife Leaving no allotments status or cultural/religious during deployment. traditions to keep her in line. Not sharing pay or financial Keeping all legal documents in your records. Telling her what she can buy. name. Saying you’re the CO and Preventing her from getting a the family is your troops. Taking checking account, credit cards, p h over as head of the household a job, or schooling. y post-deployment. l si a ca xu l se VIOLENCE

Developed from: Domestic Abuse Intervention Project Produced and distributed by: 205 West 4th Street Duluth, MN 55805 NATIONAL CENTER on Domestic and Sexual Violen training ¥ consulting ¥ advo 218.722.4134 7800 Shoal Creek, Ste 120-N ¥ Austin Texas 7 tel: 512.407.9020 ¥ fax: 512.407.9022 ¥ www.ncd

Fall 2003 • Juvenile and Family Court Journal 131 The War on Violence

END NOTES

1 JUDITH E. BEALS,THE MILITARY RESPONSE TO DOMESTIC 14 Initial Report, supra note 3, at 57-58, and at 82-83, at VIOLENCE TOOLS FOR CIVILIAN ADVOCATES, (2003). See also http://www.dtic.mil/domestic id. at Appendix, Memorandum from Deputy Secretary of violence/reports/DV_RPT2.PDF. Defense Paul Wolfowitz to secretaries of the military departments (Nov. 19, 2001) (citing that in Fiscal Year 15 Initial Report, supra note 3, at 87-90, which also includes 2000, more than 10,500 physical and/or sexual assaults other military preventive efforts. of a spouse were substantiated in the Department of Defense Family Advocacy Program, with more than 16 For more information, and a review of the DTFDV’s rec- 5,200 active duty personnel identified as the alleged ommendations on this subject, see Laura J. Hickman & perpetrators). Lois M. Davis, Formalizing Collaborations: Establishing Domestic Violence Memorandums of Understanding 2 The Miles Foundation, Domestic Violence in the Military: Between Military Installations and Civilian Interpersonal Violence Associated with the Military: Communities (Issue Paper) (2003), at http:// Facts and Findings, available at http://hometown. www.rand.org/publications/IP/IP254/ IP254.pdf. aol.com/ milesfdn/, citing 60 Minutes, “The War at Home,” (CBS television broadcast, Jan. 17, 1999). 17 Third Year Report, supra note 4, at xiv.

3 Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence: Initial Report, at 52 (2001), at http://www. dtic.mil/domestic violence/Report.pdf. [hereinafter Initial Report].

4 Defense Task Force on Domestic Violence: Third Year Report 2003,at v, at http://www.dtic.mil/domestic violence/reports/DV_RPT3.PDF. [hereinafter Third Year Report].

5 Military Family Resource Center, Profile of the Military Community: 1999 Demographics, at http://www. mfrc-dodqol.org/wordfiles/Demographics_1999_1.doc (last visited Nov. 10, 2003).

6 BEALS, supra note 1.

7 Christine Hansen, A Considerable Service:An Advocate’s Introduction to Domestic Violence and the Military, 6 DOMESTIC VIOLENCE REP. 4, 60 (April/May 2001).

8 Id.

9 All three reports may be viewed online at the DTFDV’s Web site at http://www.dtic.mil/domesticviolence.

10 Third Year Report, supra note 4, at 21.

11 Id. at viii.

12 Id. at x.

13 Family Violence Prevention Fund, Fort Bragg Domestic Homicide Review, (Nov. 12, 2002) at http://www.end abuse.org/newsflash/index.php3?Search=Article&News FlashID=387 (providing a chronology of events).

132 Juvenile and Family Court Journal • Fall 2003