[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ admin_label=”section” _builder_version=”4.16″ global_colors_info=”{}” custom_padding=”14px|||||”][et_pb_row admin_label=”row” _builder_version=”4.16″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.16″ custom_padding=”|||” global_colors_info=”{}” custom_padding__hover=”|||”][et_pb_text admin_label=”Text” _builder_version=”4.19.0″ background_size=”initial” background_position=”top_left” background_repeat=”repeat” hover_enabled=”0″ global_colors_info=”{}” sticky_enabled=”0″]<\/p>\n
For years, the Brookline woman\u2019s husband abused her. According to motions she filed with Norfolk Probate and Family Court, he would throw things at her, rant in the middle of the night, take her purse and phone so she couldn\u2019t leave, call her names, and stalk her at work. The man threatened to rape her and slammed a bed frame on the floor.<\/span><\/p>\n Because much of his abuse was not physical, the woman only applied for a restraining order more than a year after she left the marriage, in 2022, after an incident when he physically pulled her away from a car as they were transferring custody of their son and engaged in behavior that endangered their son, according to the restraining order.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n Since she left her husband, the woman, who requested anonymity as a victim of domestic violence, said she has learned the term \u201ccoercive control,\u201d a pattern of behavior where an abuser controls their victim through intimidation, isolation, or threats. That definition, she said, fit her situation perfectly.<\/span><\/p>\n But under state law, a person can only get a restraining order if there is a threat of physical harm or sexual assault.<\/span><\/p>\n If the law recognized other types of abusive behavior, the woman said, \u201cI think I would have had a restraining order from day one. I didn\u2019t have a restraining order, so a year and a half into the divorce process, I experienced another assault.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n The woman has joined other advocates for survivors of domestic violence who are seeking to change Massachusetts law to let a judge issue a restraining order when there is a pattern of \u201ccoercive control\u201d or technological abuse.<\/span><\/p>\n Bills\u00a0sponsored<\/a>\u00a0by Representatives Natalie Higgins and Tram Nguyen and Senator Michael Moore would let a judge issue a restraining order based on \u201ca pattern of conduct that has the purpose or effect of substantially restricting an individual\u2019s safety or autonomy through intimidation, isolation, implicit or explicit threats, or by compelling compliance.\u201d The bill gives examples including repeatedly humiliating someone, isolating them from friends and family, controlling their finances, damaging property, abusing pets, or threatening to report them to immigration authorities. Technological abuse includes cyberstalking or \u201crevenge porn,\u201d which is nonconsensual sharing of explicit images.<\/span><\/p>\n Since state domestic violence laws were written, the understanding of what constitutes domestic abuse has evolved, and laws must keep up. Advocates make a strong case that the abuse many people, often women, experience from intimate partners is not adequately accounted for in current law. However, lawmakers must make sure any law has a clear, narrow definition, so judges, lawyers, and litigants understand exactly what behavior is inappropriate.<\/span><\/p>\n The term \u201ccoercive control\u201d was coined in a 2007\u00a0book<\/a>\u00a0by that name. It has become commonly used by researchers to explain how abusers use coercive behavior to control their victim in ways other than violence. Over the last four years, Hawaii, California, Connecticut, and Washington incorporated the concept into state laws that define domestic violence \u2014 generally in civil laws related to child custody or restraining orders. Scotland in 2018 passed a law making domestic violence through coercive control a criminal offense.<\/span><\/p>\n Michelle Cruz, a Western Massachusetts attorney who represents victims of intimate partner violence, said the police and courts still lack an understanding of coercive control so abusive behavior is often seen as innocuous and not reflected in judicial decisions about restraining orders and child custody. \u201cThe problem is the system hasn\u2019t caught up,\u201d Cruz said.<\/span><\/p>\n Cruz said changing the law then educating judges about coercive control could allow victims to more quickly find safety \u2014 and save lives. Looking only at violence and not other types of abuse, she said, avoids identifying behavior that can be a precursor to homicide.<\/span><\/p>\n Marsha Kazarosian, a past president of the Massachusetts Bar Association who represents victims seeking restraining orders, said attorneys have long faced challenges obtaining protection for clients who are harassed and coerced in ways other than the threat of violence. \u201cThere are just so many ways that a person of power in a relationship can exercise control that would limit somebody\u2019s freedom or threaten their safety or demean or diminish them to a point they\u2019re no longer themselves,\u201d Kazarosian said.<\/span><\/p>\n Hema Sarang-Sieminski, deputy director of Jane Doe Inc., The Massachusetts Coalition Against Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence, agreed that current restraining order law \u201creally leaves out a number of behaviors that are at the heart of what we consider the dynamics of power and control at the heart of domestic violence \u2014 the control, the isolation, psychological abuse or harm.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n The Massachusetts Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers opposes expanding the law unless the conduct is carefully defined. John Amabile, president of the Massachusetts Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, raised concerns about the serious impact of a restraining order, since violating one is a criminal offense. \u201cIt\u2019s very important the orders be limited to a very narrow range of conduct,\u201d Amabile said. \u201cBroadening the scope of the issuance of restraining orders is something that has to be done with a lot of care, and having amorphous definitions that are not easily understood is a bad idea.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n Any update needs to be done in a way that is narrowly tailored and easy for judges and litigants to understand. There is also a desperate need for judges to be educated about domestic abuse.<\/span><\/p>\n For years, domestic violence victims\u00a0have reported<\/a> that family court judges do not believe their allegations of abuse and hold abuse allegations against them. Joan Meier, founding director of the National Family Violence Law Center at George Washington University Law School, found in a 2020 study that mothers\u2019 claims of abuse tend to increase their risk of losing custody, especially when fathers say the mother is trying to alienate them.<\/span><\/p>\n Domestic violence situations are often messy and complicated. As the understanding of domestic violence changes, the law needs to keep pace.<\/span><\/p>\n Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us on Twitter at\u00a0@GlobeOpinion<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n [\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Since state domestic violence laws were written, the understanding of what constitutes domestic abuse has evolved, and laws must keep up. Advocates make a strong case that the abuse many […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":11,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_et_pb_use_builder":"on","_et_pb_old_content":" For years, the Brookline woman\u2019s husband abused her. According to motions she filed with Norfolk Probate and Family Court, he would throw things at her, rant in the middle of the night, take her purse and phone so she couldn\u2019t leave, call her names, and stalk her at work. The man threatened to rape her and slammed a bed frame on the floor.<\/span><\/p>\r\n Because much of his abuse was not physical, the woman only applied for a restraining order more than a year after she left the marriage, in 2022, after an incident when he physically pulled her away from a car as they were transferring custody of their son and engaged in behavior that endangered their son, according to the restraining order.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n<\/div>\r\n Since she left her husband, the woman, who requested anonymity as a victim of domestic violence, said she has learned the term \u201ccoercive control,\u201d a pattern of behavior where an abuser controls their victim through intimidation, isolation, or threats. That definition, she said, fit her situation perfectly.<\/span><\/p>\r\n But under state law, a person can only get a restraining order if there is a threat of physical harm or sexual assault.<\/span><\/p>\r\n If the law recognized other types of abusive behavior, the woman said, \u201cI think I would have had a restraining order from day one. I didn\u2019t have a restraining order, so a year and a half into the divorce process, I experienced another assault.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n The woman has joined other advocates for survivors of domestic violence who are seeking to change Massachusetts law to let a judge issue a restraining order when there is a pattern of \u201ccoercive control\u201d or technological abuse.<\/span><\/p>\r\n Bills\u00a0sponsored<\/a>\u00a0by Representatives Natalie Higgins and Tram Nguyen and Senator Michael Moore would let a judge issue a restraining order based on \u201ca pattern of conduct that has the purpose or effect of substantially restricting an individual\u2019s safety or autonomy through intimidation, isolation, implicit or explicit threats, or by compelling compliance.\u201d The bill gives examples including repeatedly humiliating someone, isolating them from friends and family, controlling their finances, damaging property, abusing pets, or threatening to report them to immigration authorities. Technological abuse includes cyberstalking or \u201crevenge porn,\u201d which is nonconsensual sharing of explicit images.<\/span><\/p>\r\n Since state domestic violence laws were written, the understanding of what constitutes domestic abuse has evolved, and laws must keep up. Advocates make a strong case that the abuse many people, often women, experience from intimate partners is not adequately accounted for in current law. However, lawmakers must make sure any law has a clear, narrow definition, so judges, lawyers, and litigants understand exactly what behavior is inappropriate.<\/span><\/p>\r\n The term \u201ccoercive control\u201d was coined in a 2007\u00a0book<\/a>\u00a0by that name. It has become commonly used by researchers to explain how abusers use coercive behavior to control their victim in ways other than violence. Over the last four years, Hawaii, California, Connecticut, and Washington incorporated the concept into state laws that define domestic violence \u2014 generally in civil laws related to child custody or restraining orders. Scotland in 2018 passed a law making domestic violence through coercive control a criminal offense.<\/span><\/p>\r\n Michelle Cruz, a Western Massachusetts attorney who represents victims of intimate partner violence, said the police and courts still lack an understanding of coercive control so abusive behavior is often seen as innocuous and not reflected in judicial decisions about restraining orders and child custody. \u201cThe problem is the system hasn\u2019t caught up,\u201d Cruz said.<\/span><\/p>\r\n Cruz said changing the law then educating judges about coercive control could allow victims to more quickly find safety \u2014 and save lives. Looking only at violence and not other types of abuse, she said, avoids identifying behavior that can be a precursor to homicide.<\/span><\/p>\r\n Marsha Kazarosian, a past president of the Massachusetts Bar Association who represents victims seeking restraining orders, said attorneys have long faced challenges obtaining protection for clients who are harassed and coerced in ways other than the threat of violence. \u201cThere are just so many ways that a person of power in a relationship can exercise control that would limit somebody\u2019s freedom or threaten their safety or demean or diminish them to a point they\u2019re no longer themselves,\u201d Kazarosian said.<\/span><\/p>\r\n Hema Sarang-Sieminski, deputy director of Jane Doe Inc., The Massachusetts Coalition Against Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence, agreed that current restraining order law \u201creally leaves out a number of behaviors that are at the heart of what we consider the dynamics of power and control at the heart of domestic violence \u2014 the control, the isolation, psychological abuse or harm.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n The Massachusetts Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers opposes expanding the law unless the conduct is carefully defined. John Amabile, president of the Massachusetts Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, raised concerns about the serious impact of a restraining order, since violating one is a criminal offense. \u201cIt\u2019s very important the orders be limited to a very narrow range of conduct,\u201d Amabile said. \u201cBroadening the scope of the issuance of restraining orders is something that has to be done with a lot of care, and having amorphous definitions that are not easily understood is a bad idea.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\r\n Any update needs to be done in a way that is narrowly tailored and easy for judges and litigants to understand. There is also a desperate need for judges to be educated about domestic abuse.<\/span><\/p>\r\n For years, domestic violence victims\u00a0have reported<\/a>\u00a0that family court judges do not believe their allegations of abuse and hold abuse allegations against them. Joan Meier, founding director of the National Family Violence Law Center at George Washington University Law School, found in a 2020\u00a0study<\/a>\u00a0that mothers\u2019 claims of abuse tend to increase their risk of losing custody, especially when fathers say the mother is trying to alienate them.<\/span><\/p>\r\n Domestic violence situations are often messy and complicated. As the understanding of domestic violence changes, the law needs to keep pace.<\/span><\/p>\r\n\r\n\r\n
\nSince state domestic violence laws were written, the understanding of what constitutes domestic abuse has evolved, and laws must keep up. Advocates make a strong case that the abuse many people, often women, experience from intimate partners is not adequately accounted for in current law.<\/h2>\r\n
\r\n