After 20 years’ fight, expanded domestic violence law in NY state

Twenty years ago, Assemblywoman Helene E. Weinstein of Brooklyn introduced legislation that would expand protections for victims of domestic and intimate partner violence in New York state. After reintroducing similar legislation every year since, the Fair Access bill has finally passed in the state legislature and will soon be signed into law by Governor David Paterson. From the NY Times:

The new law would make it possible for people in dating relationships, heterosexual or gay, to seek protection from abusers in family court. As it stands, New York has one of the narrowest domestic violence laws in the country, allowing for civil protection orders only against spouses or former spouses, blood relations or the other parent of an abused person’s child …

“New York lagged behind all the other states in the Northeast in terms of addressing orders of protection,” the governor said. “We expanded the coverage to include what we would consider to be intimate relationships. They do not have to be sexual. Theoretically, it could be two people who are dating and haven’t had sex. They’ve come close, one refuses the other and then the stalking starts.”

Advocacy groups say that current law has deterred teenagers and gay men and women from seeking protection from abusers, because their only recourse is the criminal courts. Getting an order of protection in criminal court requires reporting abuse to the police, the arrest of the alleged abuser, and the cooperation of a prosecutor.

Civil protection orders in family court accept a lower burden of proof and do not require police involvement, and an accuser can be represented by a lawyer and not have to rely on a prosecutor.

This is an incredibly important development. My partner works as a lawyer representing victims of domestic and intimate partner violence and has frequently voiced her frustration and anger at the lack of recourse available to clients whose relationships with their abusers do not fall within the incredibly narrow requirements of the current law.

These limitations do work against many adults in heterosexual relationships – as it stands, the law only allows orders of protection “against spouses or former spouses, blood relations or the other parent of an abused person’s child,” excluding a vast swath of intimate and domestic relationships of any sexuality – but they also tend to severely limit the options for queer people and teenagers, as the NY Times article points out. Both populations are particularly vulnerable to domestic and intimate partner violence, both because of the lack of options and because of the lack of awareness that this violence happens all too frequently to teens and queer people.

A survey released on Tuesday reveals that “sixty-nine percent of teens who had sex by age 14 reported some type of abuse in a relationship, with slightly more than one-third saying they had been physically abused.” That is one horrifying statistic. And safer sex education isn’t the only thing that’s severely lacking; education about abuse in relationships is also missing, and the results are clearly damaging, as the CNN article states: “Despite the number of teens and tweens who say they have experienced abuse or say they know someone who has, only about 51 percent say they are aware of the warning signs of hurtful dating relationship.”

Intimate partner violence is also a serious problem in the LGBTQ community, but one that frequently goes overlooked and unreported. People tend to think of domestic violence as resulting from clearly gendered power dynamics, with abusers tending to be men and victims tending to be women. And though it is true that sexism and misogyny create a society in which this is true, that doesn’t mean that the gender dynamic is always the same in instances of domestic and intimate partner violence. We can’t pretend that same-sex relationships create instant equality, eliminate power dynamics and erase the chance of intimate partner violence. That only serves to limit the resources available to LGBTQ survivors of abuse and force them into silence and even shame. The LGBTQ community must recognize that this is a problem for us as much as it’s a problem for straight people, and we must respond as a community by acknowledging and condemning abuse and supporting survivors.

I hope that the passage of legislation like the Fair Access bill will help LGBTQ, youth, and other survivors of abuse not only by giving them more recourse for protection from their abusers but by also bringing attention to the problems of abuse in these communities. Tremendous thanks to Assemblywoman Weinstein and all of the domestic violence advocates, including my partner, who have fought this twenty year battle to win protections that should have existed as a no-brainer in the first place.

cross-posted at AngryBrownButch

Author: has written 28 posts for this blog.

Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

7 Responses

  1. Chel
    Chel July 10, 2008 at 2:06 pm |

    Wow, that is a really great development. It makes me wonder what the exact protections are for people in my state are…hmm I shall see about that.

    On the 69% statistic of children under 14 having sex…. I have always had the opinion that the rise and existence of internet porn (and how accessible it is) has something to do with the way young boys/teens are introduced to viewing girls/women sexually in their lives. From what I have heard from my guy friends they (on avg.) first saw porn (on the internet) at the age of 12. WOW was all I could say. I can’t help but think that with the already violent and sexually violent messages they are getting from mainstream media + the violent and sexually violent and degrading messages they will receive from watching porn will have a horrible impact on how boys develop sexually and in relationships with partners during their lives (and especially early on). It is an age when boys are made to be extremely ‘tough’ to impress their peers and try to emulate the behaviors of men, and seeing men being “tough” (abusive) during porn probably doesn’t send the right message to them on how they should behave when confronted with a sexual situation. Such young kids do not have the same ‘filter’ as many adults do (and not all adults even do) to such images and messages.

    I have talked to a guy friend about this and he completely disagrees that porn can have such an impact, but hell I went along with listening to Hansen for almost a year just because my best friends loved them. And they were hoorrrible. I don’t think it would be any different with the macho-esq nature of well, the media and porn and 12-14 year old boys.

    I don’t mean for this to become an argument about porn, I just brought up the fact that it could be a possible impactor in the 69% statistic that was brought up in the post. Knowing such impactors could possibly help keep the rate of abuse among such young, sexually active kids lower (hopefully much lower that 69%).

  2. Katherine
    Katherine July 10, 2008 at 2:35 pm |

    About bloody time NYC. How does a law get so obviously behind the times like that?

  3. james
    james July 10, 2008 at 3:22 pm |

    What’s the justification for drawing the line for orders of protection at dating relationships? Why shouldn’t they just be applicable to anyone? I can’t really see why there should be a line at all.

  4. Lydia
    Lydia July 10, 2008 at 9:23 pm |

    Congratulations lawyers. This is great. I volunteer at a DV shelter and learned all about family law in Massachusetts, but I had no idea that in nearby New York, things were so much more difficult. They’re hard enough, even in the so-called ‘liberal’ areas…

  5. mistymorning
    mistymorning July 10, 2008 at 11:06 pm |

    Fantastic news. I’m working in India at the moment with female sex-workers, and part of my role is training them about the DV protections which were enacted here only two years ago. Before that, no civil remedies at all. And even this new DV Act is limited to protecting female victims from male husbands/live-in partners, and most locals I speak to don’t accept that gender-neutral or relationship-neutral drafting might have been more helpful. But that’s all to do with the culture here; really surprised to hear NY has only just moved ahead.

  6. Feministe » “Why did she stay?”

    [...] barriers women and men face in getting help (although I’m glad to say that there’s one less barrier in NY). It is also a space to talk about how we can improve things — both the actual [...]

Comments are closed.

The commenting period has expired for this post. If you wish to re-open the discussion, please do so in the latest Open Thread.