We are, as usual, moving at a clipped pace through the 2017 legislative session.
This year, as in years past, we start out with an array of proposals to improve the system, increase safety and reinforce accountability for the commission of domestic violence crimes. It has been many years since we have seen significant success that advances the reforms necessary. There is any number of explanations for this, most of which is professional speculation.
Domestic violence is a complex social problem and crime that most people still don’t understand well, nor is there any sustained sense of urgency to address the problem. It feels as if a kind of complacency has set in, like “this is a problem that has been addressed many years ago.” Domestic violence is an issue that many, many people still want to ignore, minimize or blame victims for.
One of the bills introduced this session, after dying last year, was proposed mandatory training for first responders and other system intervenors. I say “was” because it didn’t cross over in either legislative body. Currently, law enforcement, fire department, emergency medical responders, corrections officers, sheriffs may get training — or not — none of them meeting best practice standards. Without sufficient training, how can a person reasonably expect an effective response or appropriate support to navigate the tangled path to safety and healing?
Training is a key part of the strategy to identify domestic violence. Health care providers, faith-based leaders, lawyers, first responders and hairstylists can all make a difference between life and death for a survivor who is isolated by the abuser, prohibited from having contact with family and friends, being stalked through phone and social media means, or sabotaged at work.
That’s why one small success, thus far, is that Senate Bill 518 crossed over in both houses. It’s not much — but we take what we can get in the best interests of our large constituency of survivors who have too little support.
A person might get some help from their “savvy stylist.” We see this as a good thing. Not because the survivor has gone to cosmetically conceal her bruises, or have “heartfelt wisdom and one-liners dished out while having her split ends conditioned,” as one local columnist opined recently. But rather, to receive support or key information from a person who understands the challenges, and is sufficiently informed to guide her client to experts and domestic violence programs.
Speaking of support, it would be an oversight not to mention legislative support in the way of budget appropriations. State funding is imperative to sustain essential programs needed by survivors. Grants from private foundations in the $5,000 range can’t keep services in place; individual contributions are also not sufficient to pay staff and meet costs to run programs.
Rarely (never?) have state agencies increased the amount of money in their budgets to increase capacity of programs or increase amounts to support the programs — not in the domestic violence arena, anyway. It has also been left to the programs to educate legislators about programs and need.
The grant-in-aid process is still very much a mystery. The Domestic Violence Action Center currently has a grant-in-aid under consideration to continue a partnership with the Honolulu Police Department to provide advocates on scene when police respond to a domestic violence call. This grant would be the only monies available to fund the program, which itself was born after widespread concern about police practices involving domestic violence.
We are clinging to hope that our legislators see the value and match our hope with dollars to help survivors on the ground. Otherwise, those “savvy stylists” take on greater meaning.
———
New York Times columnist Maureen Dowd is off today.
Nanci Kreidman is chief executive officer of the Domestic Violence Action Center.
