VAWA: did you know you can be jailed if your wife even *fears* you might be violent?

Question

According to VAWA (Violence Against Women Act): "“The term ‘domestic violence'' includes felony or misdemeanor crimes of violence".

But according to The Online Lawyer Source: "The term, “includes,” [in the above quote] is being used as a loophole. Law enforcement officials have been using this loophole to implement statutes allowing people to claim domestic violence or obtain restraining orders if they are merely “afraid” or “fearful” of violence.

Now, 63 percent of all states define domestic violence so that it includes psychological distress, and 33 percent include “harassment.”

Former president of the Massachusetts Bar Association, Elaine Epstein, said, “Everyone knows that restraining orders and orders to vacate are granted to virtually all who apply … in many cases, allegations of abuse are now used for tactical advantage.”

http://www.onlinelawyersource.com/news/false-allegation-domestic.html

Does it surprise you that you can be jailed over your wife/partner's fears?

Answer 1

So, you think in order for a restraining order to be issued, the chick should have the c**p kicked out of her first? Makes sense.

Answer 2

In the US, you are innocent until proven guilty... I'm not sure why certain groups are above the law though. If I was 'scared' of a woman taking my money, should she have full embezzlement charges... or just petty theft? Hmmm.. which charge should she get? Should we be lenient and only give her a few months prison?

Obviously, if there was abuse then measures need to be taken to take the victim out of that environment. No one should be abused.

Edit: read above... I agree with Elf. I don't see a problem with restraining orders because we must protect victims but I don't see why someone should be jailed because someone else was 'scared they would do something'.

You have to make sure that the restraining order is not used as a weapon for women to kidnap a man's child either.(out of malice).

Answer 3

Imagine my frustration when I realized I may as well have beaten my ex-wife into a pulp every time I felt like it, but didn't.  Oh well, still better that I took the high road even though I don't get credit for it, and she still got her little restraining order.  This is pretty dumb though.  Claiming abuse has just become part of the divorce process--a step on the path to "greener grass."  In the meantime, the women who are really, truly being beaten, who have legitimate reasons to divorce, and to receive protection are having the resources they need wasted on this frivolous dribble.

Answer 4

Yes ! And the encoding the so-called "gender neutral" statements within it is actually a guise to trick people into believing that men are included in it ! Cya later when I get out on bail !

Answer 5

Then, how do they distinquish between genuine fear and that which is imagined; being a woman I would like to know.  Far be it from me to use such tactics; only a curiosity.

Answer 6

Considering that men and women are almost equally victims of DV, it is unfair for this law to exist. If I fear emotional harassment (which in India is illegal) from my wife, nobody would do anything. I'm male, so I'm disposable and don't matter. The princesses are the ones to save, we're just their playthings.

It is no surprise some things are punished only if men indulge in them (emotional harrassment).

The teachers in school don't punish a boy if I fear he might bully me.

My boss won't fire an employer because I fear a colleague might make my life h**l.

So why should men be jailed? How can you tell if a fear is justified or not? It is like predicting a team to win the league before the season starts, and betting your life savings on them to win it. I find more often than not, that the women bet on Bolton, not Man Utd or Chelsea.

If you didn't understand, I'm saying that women aren't clairvoyant. Who is?

Erring on the side of caution is well appreciated if the femstats were true, but the real stat is roughly 50/50.

Answer 7

I think you've got your information just a bit off.  You don't get jailed for a restraining order unless you violate it.

That being said, especially in Massachusetts, "Fear" itself is often used as means of getting a restraining order.  The number one reason of getting a restraining order?

To force the person to move out of the house.

It doesn't surprise me.  My thought is that Judge's who issue restraining orders fear that they will be one the front page of the newspaper if one woman is killed because they did not issue the restraining order.

Answer 8

no it does not. i think the idea is to make marriage so unattractive that we will give up on the idea. that and the easy transfer of assets and custodial rights of course, notice that they are also trying to curb marriages to women from overseas. there are some very sick minds behind all of this.

funny how these supposedly liberal feminists all disappear when these questions come up.

ps, which one of you desperate feminists took my avatar?

Answer 9

Honestly, I prefer that the law errs on the side of caution by granting restraining orders rather than denying the order and having yet another victim needing medical care, or worse, one who loses their life to domestic violence.

Such fears are usually not unfounded. Verbal abuse is frequently used to erode a person's self-esteem and in most cases escalates to physical violence.   By including protective measures for verbal abuse, the law seeks to intervene before physical injury occurs.

<please note that my entire post above is gender-neutral>

Many months ago, when I was a GWS newbie, I posted my thoughts on proportional funding for men and women.   That is, if 12 out of every 100 victims of DV are men, then 12% of the funding should be allocated to provide shelters and other resources for men.  If 34 out of every 100 victims are men, then 34% of the funding should go to provide resources for men.    Sadly, very few men even read my suggestion, let alone picked it up and ran with it.

Answer 10

Here's an idea: "Don't scare women! They scare easily. Get it?!"

If someone, man, woman, or child scares easily, just leave them the f#^&* alone.  Every guy who has the least bit of common sense knows when he's being a pest or a menace to a woman. Avoid the fear ridden b%^&*.

Answer 11

That makes perfect sense to feminists since men are evil and violent.

Answer 12

I'm not surprised at all. However,  it does nothing  more than accentuate the fact that women are indeed the weaker s*x and need to be afforded extreme measures of protection. At the same time men are, yet again,  at our mercy.  Such a shame....