Author: has written 427 posts for this blog.

Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

11 Responses

  1. Abyss2hope
    Abyss2hope May 16, 2009 at 3:44 pm |

    These types of errors are why it is so important that all who report rape know that victims advocates can help with this type of paperwork.

    The way the AG initially responded to the original story didn’t help at all since he let the public get the impression that the expenses for the forensic exams first had to go through the survivor’s insurance when that isn’t true and it is only the medical treatment of the victim which needs to go to insurance, if available, prior to being approved for reimbursement.

  2. Faith
    Faith May 16, 2009 at 4:13 pm |

    Yeah this is good, but I wonder how many who expressed outrage actually did anything to address this. The reporting of this is still problematic as basic journalistic fact-checking is missing these days. Just like yesterday when people confused a ruling from the CA Supreme Court last year for something new that day and reported that Prop 8 had been struck down. We really need to be careful about regurgitating stories coming from other sources and try to generate our own leads.

  3. Criss
    Criss May 16, 2009 at 11:43 pm |

    I’m too lazy to click on the links, but… do they PAY for the rape kits, or REIMBURSE?

    The quotes say “reimburse,” which means the woman must pay the up-to-$700 out of her pocket and then wait who knows how long to get paid back… which is really not much better. I don’t know about you, but I don’t generally have an extra $700 lying around that I can hand over and wait weeks for bureaucrats to get around to sending me a check…

  4. Natalia
    Natalia May 17, 2009 at 4:31 am |

    Thank God for small favours. :)

    We really need to be careful about regurgitating stories coming from other sources and try to generate our own leads.

    That can be hard – especially if you don’t have someone in the vicinity, preferably someone who can verify information. It can be one of the few major drawbacks of blogging.

  5. freida bee
    freida bee May 17, 2009 at 7:53 am |

    In Austin, home of the marvelous non-profit abuse support facility, Safeplace, counseling services are also available to victims of rape and domestic abuse.

    Their outreach is felt all over the city, including their anti-bullying talks in public schools.

    All of Texas isn’t as backwards as W would have us seem, but no one can save us from the Goodhair Perry’s, but ourselves.

    Fortunately, future voter registration models predict that if hispanics in south Texas register to vote as expected, Texas will be blue before too long. Thank goodness, or I would be advocating for the secession of Austin from TX.

  6. Nicole
    Nicole May 17, 2009 at 8:15 pm |

    My main problems with TX sexual assault laws (which are consistent with most other states I think) is that:

    1- In case the TAASA statement wasn’t clear, survivors who have a forensic exam done are REQUIRED to have a medical exam as well. It’s all well and good that the forensic exam is covered by local or State agencies (it darn well should be), but it seems duplicitous to then require that survivors pay (either through insurance or out of pocket) for the med. exam. Ultimately it’s just splitting hairs; if a survivor goes to the hospital to have a rape kit done, and isn’t able to leave unless she pays upwards of $300, can we say in good faith that the rape kit doesn’t cost her anything? It may not be a direct cost in the strictest sense, but in practice, it is.

    I understand TAASA’s position that sexual assault survivors aren’t singled out with this requirement of having to pay for the (MANDATORY) med. exam following the collection of forensic evidence, but since when is ‘everyone else is subjected to this inherently unfair treatment’ a sufficient justification?

    2-Local or state agencies only pay for the forensic exam if the survivor agrees (within 72 hours of the assault) to press charges. Given that the collected evidence can last significantly longer than 72 hours (weeks if not years I think), why put this extra pressure on the victim to make the decision to press charges? Final point- once the victim agrees to press charges and have the kit done, the investigation won’t stop until it runs it’s course. Even if the victim decides to drop charges for whatever reason, the case goes forward and she could be called as a witness, etc.

  7. Texas DOES NOT charge victims for rape kits « Babel Frog

    […] leave a comment » Feministe » Apparently, Texas Does NOT Charge Victims for Rape Kits. […]

  8. Ali
    Ali May 18, 2009 at 2:14 pm |

    @ freida bee, Austin isn’t the only place in Texas were progressives/feminists live.

    @ Nicole, Are you sure the med exam is required? I didn’t get that from my reading of the statement and I’m not sure hospitals can legally force any treatment on a person unless they’re unconscious or something. My experience comes from Alaska, but I know in my sexual assault (attempted rape) I didn’t have to go to the hospital at all, but forensic evidence was collected.

  9. Jason
    Jason May 18, 2009 at 8:02 pm |

    The medical exam (as far as I know) is actually required in order for the forensic exam to be valid. In other words, if they’re testing for a particular chemical or compound, they need to know if there are any conditions that might throw off the tests performed. If it isn’t required, it’s at least “best practices”, evidence-wise.

  10. Kathryn
    Kathryn May 20, 2009 at 10:23 am |

    Am I the only one who is concerned at the term “innocent victims”? Either they are a victim or not, innocent victim is surely tautology. I know it’s a small point, and I know somewhat it refers to legal terminology, but it still hints at the layers of misogyny and disbelief that people face.

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.