The blame game

Seven month old Triumph Alexander Skinner died, allegedly at the hands of his father Keith Skinner, this past weekend. In reading and watching the media coverage of this tragedy, people want to blame somebody for what went wrong.

The candidates for the blame game in any family violence related fatality are (in no particular order):

• Department of Children & Families (DCF)
• Law enforcement
• The court system
• Advocacy organizations
• The child's mother

Did I leave anyone out?  Oh yeah. What about the guy who beat his child to death?

Having been a member of the Domestic Violence Task Force for the past 5 years, I can assure you that everyone will pull their records and try to determine if there was something that was missed somewhere along the line. And if a deficiency is found, steps will be made to correct it.

But the reality is that Mr. Skinner, and only Mr. Skinner, is (allegedly) responsible for his son's death.

Many would argue that the mom is just as culpable as he is because she lied to investigators. But once you understand the dynamics of an abusive relationship, it's not so clear-cut.  Take a few moments to review the Power & Control Wheel if you're not familiar with it.

Try to put yourself into the shoes of a victim who has been abused verbally, physically, emotionally, and/or financially by their partner for years. Try to imagine what it's like to know in your gut that nobody else would want you, that the violence is all your fault, and that you have nobody to turn to for help. These are the things you know so deeply in your gut that it's no different from knowing what your eye color is.

Try to imagine what it's like to be so afraid for your child's safety that you stay in the relationship to protect the child, because you know that the courts will most likely order unsupervised visitation with the offending parent and you can't be there to protect your baby (whether that baby is an infant or a teenager doesn't matter).

Now try to understand that the perpetrator isn't always violent. Sometimes they are wonderful to you. Sometimes they are a terrific parent. Sometimes the relationship seems as though it's worth saving.

THIS is the victim's reality. And a victim believes this is the way life is and there's nothing he or she can do about it. Advocates try to help them see that they do have options and work on steps to pursue those options. But until a victim is ready to throw in the towel on the relationship, and seek alternatives to their situation, there is only so much that the community can do.

However, the community (that's everyone - friends, neighbors, employers, strangers, government, etc.) can do a lot to help victims and perpetrators in these situations. But for lasting change, the individuals have to want it badly enough to work at it. The victim might not be able to say "I deserve better" because he/she doesn't truly believe they do. But when a friend or co-worker repeatedly tells them so, after a while, the thought takes root and begins to blossom.

When you suspect someone is being abused, the best thing you can do for them is tell them you're concerned about their safety and try to convince them to call their local DV shelter to develop a safety plan with a trained advocate. Be supportive (not just in word, but also in deed - offer to watch their children, give them a ride if they need transportation, etc) and don't badmouth their abuser.

When you witness violence, the best thing you can do is call law enforcement and record (if possible) the incident. Many cell phones today have video and/or audio capabilities. Be willing to be inconvenienced by serving as a witness for the prosecution, even if the victim does not want to testify.

Skinner and his victim reportedly had numerous contacts with the criminal justice system, the injunction courts, and DCF. He had a history of violence and was even sentenced in 2005 to 4 years in prison for a 2004 child abuse charge. His wife had filed injunctions against him in 2001 and 2004.

And yet a 7-month old child lies in the morgue, after having sustained heinous injuries that included a perforated bowel, a severely fractured skull, and numerous fractured ribs. His 7-year old sister (the 2004 child abuse victim) was removed from the home, even though she is now safe from her father because he is in jail. She undoubtedly thinks she is being punished for having done something wrong.

When my estranged husband killed our 2-year old daughter, I was terrified that my 8-year old would be taken away from me for my "failure to protect" her baby sister (thankfully that never happened, although I did have to submit to an interview with DCF a couple days after the funeral).

Please don't blame the mother until you've walked in her shoes. Try to remember who is at fault here.

Failure to protect? Let's stop "victim blaming" once and for all

by Carol Wick, CEO
Harbor House, Inc.

Recently a woman was attacked in her own home. It wasn’t the first attack; it was the culmination of over 18 years of abuse: mental, physical, and undoubtedly sexual. During this attack, as is so often the case, her child tried to intervene and protect his mother. The result was that he was shot by the attacker (his father) in the head. His mother, panicked, did what any mother would. She grabbed the children and ran, taking her injured child to get immediate medical attention. While waiting for word on her child, staff from the Department of Children and Families came to the hospital and informed her that, despite the fact that the attacker was now in jail on no bond and no longer a threat, they were taking her children from her. Why? Because she had failed to prevent her attacker from assaulting her and therefore she was now the abuser.

The logic runs this way. If a mother remains with an abuser, she is putting her children in harms way. Rather than hold the attacker accountable, attempt to incarcerate the perpetrator or protect the mother so she can protect her children, the system seeks to hold the person least able to fix the problem accountable. Would we arrest someone in Pine Hills because they have failed to stop gang violence? Do we arrest individuals who leave their cars unlocked when someone steals their radio? No. Yet when this most basic of crime, physical assault occurs, we want to believe that we can say to the victim – make it stop. And here’s an incentive, make it stop or we will take your children away.

Failure to Protect is a term that we are working very hard to eradicate. In fact, through the Florida Coalition Against Domestic Violence (FCADV), advocates are working with DCF in Tallahassee to stop this practice all together. If, after 18 years, this mother could stop the abuse, don’t you think she would? Why do we continue to blame the victim for the brutal attacks and then sit idly by and point at her and say “well, make it stop?” Instead, this mother and her now further traumatized children, must be separated. How is the mother a harm to her children? She did the very best she could.

I have talked to literally thousands of survivors over the years. Never once did one of them tell me that they wanted the abuse to continue. On the contrary, they felt it was their fault and unbelievably, felt that they could, if they just tried hard enough, make it stop. And why shouldn’t they think that way? Apparently DCF does. And so does the State Attorney’s office. If you read the first article on this case, only a year ago this same man almost killed the mother. The charges were dropped because she would not testify. Remember the 18 years of abuse? This happens in about 80-90% of the cases. “Well, she doesn’t want to testify so what are we going to do?” is so often the response from the State.

We must, as those in the system that was created to protect victims, stop holding the victim accountable. It is imperative that we understand that someone who has been tortured for 18 years may be incapable of now standing up and testifying against their abuser or making him stop beating her. Yes, these cases are hard. Yes, they are frustrating. Yes, they sometimes end deadly.

But isn’t that why, if what we have been doing the same thing for the last 20 years and it isn’t working, we need to start trying something different?

You can read the entire story here.

_______________

And the general public wonders why abuse victims fail to access the System for help?

Additionally, it is imperative that as citizens who sometimes witness domestic assaults, either in public or when "something" is happening at a neighbor's home, become involved. Call 911. Be prepared to testify in court. The State has had some success with prosecuting offenders even when the victim refuses to testify (or even testifies on behalf of the defendant).

Domestic violence is everyone's business. More perpetrators need to be taught by our community (the criminal justice system, their friends & neighbors, business associates, etc.) that abusive behavior towards their family will not be tolerated.

Laura

Anger Management vs. BIP

We've often talked about the Batterer's Intervention Program (BIP) as being the appropriate counseling for perpetrators of domestic violence and that an Anger Management class is not recommended. The following information from the November 2009 Office of the State Courts Administrator highlights the differences between the two programs. For more info, click here.

Experts in the field of domestic violence have long considered BIPs to be best equipped to handle the needs of batterers. Anger management programs are sometimes utilized in place of BIP. While excellent at what they are designed to do, anger management programs do not generally meet the needs of most batterers. The following chart was provided by Department of Children and Families (DCF) as a helpful reminder of the differences between anger management and BIP.

Anger Management (AM) vs. Certified Batterer Intervention Program (BIP)

Are programs state certified?
AM: No
BIP: Yes. Certification is granted by the Florida Department of Children and Families, Domestic Violence Program Office.

Who is served by the programs?
AM: Perpetrators of stranger or non-intimate violence
BIP: Specifically designed to work with perpetrators of intimate partner violence.

How long are the programs?
AM: Usually 6-20 sessions, with an average program lasting 10 sessions (Typically Orange & Seminole courts order an 8-hr anger management class). 
BIP: Mandated by Florida Statute at 29 weeks which includes a minimum of 24 sessions, assessment, intake/enrollment and orientation.

Do programs contact victims?
AM: No
BIP: Yes. By letter when the batterer enrolls and is discharged from the program. If the offender makes known threats toward the victim, the program will contact the victim and the proper authorities. The victim is provided with local referral information.

Are programs monitored by a state agency?
AM: No
BIP: Yes. By the Department of Children & Families, Domestic Violence Program Office.

Are programs linked with a battered women's agency?
AM: No
BIP: Not directly. Letters to victims contain contact information for local certified domestic violence centers. Certified batterers programs are encouraged to establish relationships with their local certified centers and many have fostered that relationship.

Do programs assess batterers for lethality?
AM: No
BIP: Yes. While not a prediction model, certified assessors conduct an assessment which includes questions which reveal how potentially lethal a batterer may be - such as if he owns a gun, has a history of intimate partner violence or has been convicted of other violent offenses.

What is the emphasis of the intervention?
AM: Violence is seen as a momentary outburst of anger.
BIP: Physical violence is seen as one of many forms of abusive behaviors chosen by batterers to control their intimate partners. Other behaviors include physical, sexual, verbal, emotional and economic abuse. Batterer intervention models hold batterers accountable for the violent and abusive choices they make. They teach batterers to recognize how their abuse affects their partners and children and to practice alternatives to abusive behaviors.

Are group facilitators trained about domestic violence?
AM: Subject to agency discretion
BIP: Yes. State standards require that facilitators receive an initial 21 hours of state approved basic facilitator training, 8 hours of substance abuse as it relates to domestic violence, 4 hours of attendance at domestic violence court hearings, 40 hours of victim centered training and 84 hours of co-facilitating with a certified program (may not be completed in less than six months). Twelve CEU's in DV/batterer intervention are required annually thereafter.

How would I address grievances with this type of program?
AM: Talk to the director of the program
BIP: First, talk to the director of the program and second, notify the DCF, Office of Domestic Violence Programs, (850) 921-2168.

For more info, see What Batterer Programs Can & Cannot Demonstrably Do

One Father's Victimization by "The System"

In August, 2008 I received a call from a woman named Carol who is a real estate broker. We spoke at length about a custody case that was before Judge Alan Dickey in Seminole County. I explained to her that we focus on the criminal and injunction courts, though we hope to have enough volunteers and funding to expand into the domestic hearings at some point in the future.

Once she shared with me some of the miscarriages of justice that her friend was experiencing, I told her we would try to attend the hearings as much as possible. Considering some of the allegations involved, and the fact that there are two young children (a 6-yr old boy and 8-yr old girl) being victimized, I am not going to reveal the names of the family involved. Carol was assisting the father, whom the mother claimed had abused her and the children. Interestingly enough, allegations of abuse didn't start until the mother's immigration attorney advised her what she needed to do to be granted citizenship in the USA (police reports alleging abuse and being accepted as a resident into a DV shelter are needed).

Multiple witnesses - the neighbors, the police and even the independent psychologist - testified they never saw one single sign of abuse being perpetrated by the father. The children never indicated any abuse by him either. All the abuse allegations were by people testifying based on what the mother told them. Witnesses alleged that [the mother] has told the children to cross busy 6-lane highways against the lights where motorists have yelled "Lady are you trying to kill your kids?!" The father is terrified she will "accidentally" kill them. Additionally, the daughter alleged that sexual improprieties by a member of her mother's church had occurred while she was in her mother's care. DCF and the judge chose to disregard her allegations because she didn't verbalize them during the interview.

The father's first attorney was less than aggressive in advocating for his client, and Carol believes this is one reason for the judge's seeming bias against him. Carol, as well as our volunteers who monitored the hearing last month, believe that the fact that the father is from Iran worked also against him (the mother is from Turkey).

CourtWatch had two volunteers in Judge Dickey's courtroom for the 2-day hearing held in July. Carol told me after the hearing "I am sure that having 2 courtwatchers sitting there the whole 2 days with the big CourtWatch badge really helped. He [the judge] really seemed (for the first time that I have seen in this case ) that he was really trying to be fair! I was just so pleased that this time he let [the father] speak and didn't shut him up and speak rudely to him this time."

CourtWatcher #1 said "Judge Dickey in my estimation had already made a decision, and possibly before the hearing started. In his ruling he made mention of a previous ruling and declared that he stood by it. . . He believed that [the father] coming home to clean, wash and take care of the kids was controlling behavior. . . Apparently the Guardian Ad Litem was attacked during his testimony by [the mother's] lawyer as being biased in favor of the father. The judge explained, while making his ruling that the GAL had more opportunity to spend with the father due to the circumstances of the mother, her and her friends distrust of the GAL (reasonable or otherwise). Unfortunately the judge used this same explanation to minimize the GAL recommendation, that he [the GAL] didn't get to spend time with the mother, that his report ended at a certain date and it's the judge's belief that the relationship between the mother and the children got better after that date."

CourtWatcher #2 told me "Judge Dickey was fair and courteous to all parties. He did not behave as I had seen him a year or so ago when he would insult attorneys or their clients. The attorneys were well prepared and sharp. Those are my observations as a courtwatcher. Personally, I had no opinion on who should have the children until the last (15th) witness, the guardian ad litem for the children. He finally said what needed to be said and knew how to answer questions so the information did not get choked off or twisted by either attorney. Unfortunately, the children must remain with the mother for at least another week until the verdict is given. A motion by the GAL for immediate reversal of custody was ignored for about 2 months by the judge and he still does not seem concerned, so I do not know how he will rule. I do not know why the Safehouse has kept Mom for 10 months with no evidence of abuse. She seems to be taking advantage of the free lodging, groceries and childcare. The father obviously loves his children and had taken almost sole care of them when the family was together. DCF has apparently let this slide also."

The verdict?

CourtWatcher #2: "I was shocked by Judge Dickey's rulings in this case on Friday [July 31st]. He gave permanent custody to the mother who still lives at Safehouse and works 2 jobs at a deli and cleaning houses. She plans to attend SCC as a full time student this fall also. She has been severe in discliplining the children in the past, keeps few appointments with counselors, avoids contact with child care personnel, and apparently has little one-on-one time with the children. Judge Dickey explains all this as being the father's fault: providing her a car that breaks down frequently, not paying enough for child support, failing to get mother a green card, and being too permissive and lax with the children so they will not obey the mother. The judge says this is all a plot to keep control over the family. He believes the father is playing a game with money, hiding it from the Court. He cites this as the primary weapon of father's control. . . To me, it appears the judge reached his decisions early in this process and has conveniently fit all testimony to his pre-conceived story of control and deceit. It was a circular argument assuming the premise that the father has money no one can find. Expert witnesses were either denied testimony ( Dr. Tressler, child psychologist) or ignored (Mr. MaGill, guardian ad litem). Judge believes Mr MaGill was paid by father, but he was actually paid by the court. . . Perhaps in time his ruling will prove to be injurious to the children and we may need to call him to account. . . Perhaps the judge is right about the father having money he alone controls, but my alarm is that the judge was angry about that and sentenced these 2 children to a miserable life to punish him."

And from Carol: "[The father] hasn't been able to pay the last 2 months rent as it all went to the children's defense. He is giving away his stuff including lots of books, kids books, toys, and other items since he will be forced to move soon and is expecting to be put in jail on September 1st [for Contempt of Court - not paying his ex-wife's legal fees of $20k+]. If you know of anyone who could use these books and toys, let me know. . . No matter what, I do think you made a little difference as the judge wasn't as blatantly rude and biased as usual. I was hoping that meant he was really listening, but as we thought all along, he already had his mind made up."

Judge Dickey had a preconceived notion about this case and after 2 full days of testimony, stood by those preconceptions. What is the point of having a hearing if you're going to ignore the testimony presented? As one courtwatcher said, "Perhaps in time his ruling will prove to be injurious to the children and we may need to call him to account." Does a child have to be injured or killed before the judge is held accountable for this decision? The very thought chills me to the bone. Meanwhile, these two children are exhibiting inappropriate sexual behavior and Judge Dickey refuses to believe that being with Mom is not the in their best interest.

I hope the father in this case is able to appeal the judge's decision, even though his health is poor and he is destitute (he has relied on the generosity of friends to pay for his legal fees and heart medications). He is preparing to be put in jail next month because he simply cannot come up with the thousands of dollars that Judge Dickey seems to believe he can access. Perhaps a father's rights group will sponsor an appeal on his behalf.

If you know of resources that could be of use to him, please email or call me.