Categories
Gender Agenda Gender Identity Media Press Release Sex Education Title IX

Public Opposition Mounts As Media Accounts Spotlight Transgender Tragedies

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Rebecca Hain

Telephone: 513-479-3335

Email: info@saveservices.org

Public Opposition Mounts As Media Accounts Spotlight Transgender Tragedies

February 14, 2024 – Abandoned by her birth-mother at an early age, Jennifer Kolstad had experienced a variety of mental health problems. After she began to identify as a boy at age 13, her parents cautioned that she was too young to make such a life-altering decision. When her parents refused to approve gender-transitioning procedures, the Montana CPS forcibly removed her from the family home (1).

Most Americans favor laws that protect adult transgender persons from discriminatory policies in jobs and housing (2). But driven by federal policy (3), transgender “horror-stories” such as the Montana case are serving to bolster public opposition to these practices.

A 2021 Gallup poll found that 62% of Americans believed that transgender athletes should be allowed to play only on teams that matched their birth sex. When the same poll was repeated in 2023, the percentage of Americans supporting such bans had increased to 69%. (4)

Five other national surveys conducted in 2023 reveal consistent opposition to transgender policies:

Deseret News/HarrisX (5): 55% of respondents support banning gender hormone therapy on minors, and 61% want to prohibit surgical interventions to change a child’s sex.

Summit Ministries (6): 77% of voters believe that allowing males who identify as female to compete against biological women in college female sports has been harmful to women’s sports.

CRC Research and Parents Defending Education (7): 74% of registered voters believe that schools should not be allowed to help students change their gender identity without parental consent.

Scripps News/You Gov (8):

  • 54% of Americans support a federal ban on transgender females competing in school athletics.
  • 44% say they want “laws that would restrict and, or ban transgender care for minors, even with parents’ consent,” while 34% oppose such measures.

KFF/Washington Post (9):

  • 57% of American adults believe a person’s gender is based on their biological sex at birth.
  • 67% do not think that biological males should be allowed to compete in women’s sports competitions at the high school level.
  • 65% don’t believe that biological males should be allowed to compete in women’s athletics in college or professionally.
  • 77% of American adults believe it is inappropriate for teachers to discuss their transgender identities with students in kindergarten to third grade.

Since 2022, 15 national polls have been conducted on a variety of transgender-related issues, revealing a national consensus against so-called “gender affirming” policies for children and youth (10).  Lawmakers who support such policies are likely to face a negative response from voters during the upcoming November elections.

Citations:

  1. https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-13021149/montana-family-loses-custody-teen-daughter-gender-transition.html
  2. https://www.pewresearch.org/social-trends/2022/06/28/americans-complex-views-on-gender-identity-and-transgender-issues/
  3. https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/01/25/2021-01761/preventing-and-combating-discrimination-on-the-basis-of-gender-identity-or-sexual-orientation
  4. https://news.gallup.com/poll/507023/say-birth-gender-dictate-sports-participation.aspx
  5. https://www.deseret.com/2023/1/18/23548597/transgender-issues-in-schools-and-states-new-poll
  6. https://www.summit.org/about/press/poll-nearly-80-percent-say-womens-sports-harmed-by-allowing-transgender-competitors/
  7. https://wpde.com/news/nation-world/most-us-voters-support-parental-consent-in-school-gender-identity-policies-study-shows-parents-defending-education-pde-crc-research-parent-rights
  8. https://www.10news.com/scripps-news-poll-americans-largely-support-restricting-trans-rights
  9. https://nypost.com/2023/05/05/majority-of-americans-believe-gender-determined-at-birth-against-biological-males-in-womens-sports/
  10. https://www.saveservices.org/2024/02/public-opinion-polls-reveal-growing-public-opposition-to-policies-driven-by-gender-agenda/
Categories
Media Title IX

10 Times Better for Our Democracy

By Meg Mott
November 13, 2020

That’s what the new rules for Title IX are, argues Meg Mott.

As someone concerned about the fate of the Constitution under the Trump administration, I wish to publicly commend the Office for Civil Rights at the U.S. Department of Education. Through an arduous and inclusive process, it has struck an important balance between the rights of those accused of sexual assault and harassment and the needs of the accuser.

Unlike the earlier Obama-era rules, which demanded a “trauma-informed” process, the new rules follow the Bill of Rights. Instead of reducing accusers to psychologically damaged beings, the new rules require them to provide evidence for their accusations. Instead of assuming the accused is a sexual predator, it grants them the ability to mount a strong defense. By putting the burden on the institution to create a fair and adversarial system, both parties learn how to address harms in a constitutional democracy.

I didn’t always feel this way. Thirty years ago, I wanted the authorities to do more to protect women from sexual abuse. I believed that the right to due process gave sexual predators a free pass at the expense of victims. I advocated for the Violence Against Women Act, believing that stronger laws against sexual violence would empower survivors. As VAWA was implemented, the role of prosecutors was greatly expanded at the expense of women’s autonomy. If she balked at her co-parent’s impending imprisonment, the district attorney would override her wishes. Once the machinery was put in action, there was no turning back.

The Obama administration took some of the most illiberal components of VAWA and applied them to colleges and universities. A 2014 report from the White House Council on Women and Girls, titled “Not Alone,” declared that sexual assault “is a unique crime: unlike other crimes, victims often blame themselves.” Because the misconduct was assumed to damage the accuser’s psyche, basic principles of due process no longer applied. Complainants were described as “survivor” or “victim,” undermining the presumption of innocence. Neither party could freely discuss their case, a violation of their First Amendment freedoms. Persons charged with sexual harassment were not provided with specific details of the charge, nor were they given a chance to confront hostile witnesses — both violations of the Sixth Amendment.

By contrast, the new rules for sexual harassment define the complainant as “an individual who is alleged to be the victim of sexual harassment.” The respondent is “an individual who has been reported to be the perpetrator of conduct that could constitute sexual harassment.” College administrations are banned from using “gag orders,” and both parties are allowed to cross-examine each other’s testimony. Sexual harassment, which had been a notoriously vague charge, must now itemize specific instances and use objective standards as determined by the U.S. Supreme Court in the Davis decision.

One would think that all Americans would applaud the restoration of basic liberties, but that has not been the case. Former U.S. secretaries of education Arne Duncan and John King tweeted that the new rules will “put the accused before the victim.” Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi described the new rules as the “Trump administration’s wanton war to destroy Title IX’s critical protections for students and holding schools accountable.” The American Civil Liberties Union, normally a defender of fundamental rights, declared that the new rules were “devastating for survivors.” In these polarized times, commitment to civil liberties is determined more by party affiliation than respect for the Constitution. That is not good for our democracy.

In Anglo-American jurisprudence, the deck is stacked against the prosecution for a reason. Following the calculus that it is “better that 10 guilty persons escape than one innocent person suffer,” our criminal justice systems was designed to lean toward liberty and away from revenge. William Blackstone wrote that guiding principle in the 1760s. Known as Blackstone’s ratio, Benjamin Franklin amplified it in the colonies: “Better a hundred guilty persons should go free than one innocent person suffer.” In the land of freedom, the machinery of justice was designed to be imperfect in order to protect the innocent.

The Obama-era Title IX rules followed a different calculus: better for 10 innocent persons to suffer than for one survivor to experience more harm. This perversion of the Blackstone ratio was not just demanded by advocacy groups — it became the mind-set of the Department of Education and the Democratic party.

But it’s not just Democrats who reject the demands of Blackstone’s ratio. When asked in 2016 whether it was better for 20,000 guilty people to go free or for 20,000 innocent people to be jailed, 40 percent of the participants said it was better to put 20,000 innocent people in jail. Think about that. Almost half of the participants want to sacrifice the innocent rather than let the guilty go free. The Cato Institute, which conducted the survey, found the strongest indicator was not race: 60 percent of African Americans, 61 percent of Caucasians and 55 percent of Hispanics agreed that imprisoning the innocent was worse than allowing the guilty to go free. The key indicator was whether or not the participant supported Donald Trump.

Had the Cato Institute asked college students whether it was better to let 10 guilty sexual offenders go free or expel 10 innocent persons, I worry that a high majority would opt for the expulsion of innocent people. By forcing colleges to use the “trauma-informed” approach, this generation of college students has confused therapeutic interests with citizen interests. The former focuses on the subjective experience of a harmed party and is best handled with an individual or family therapist. The latter focuses on the rights of all citizens in a democracy.

My hope is that under the new rules the next generation of students will develop the skills to live in a constitutional democracy. Those who have suffered from the actions of another will have a chance to describe how those actions affected their well-being and interfered with their education. Those who are accused will be afforded the chance to mount a strong defense. Everyone involved will need to use their thinking muscles and inner moral compasses to determine a just outcome.

The system will not work perfectly; some of the guilty will go free. But those inefficiencies are the costs society pays for freedom. The new rules give America’s future leaders a deeper appreciation for liberty, even when it works against their personal interests. Perhaps in a few years, more Americans will embrace Blackstone’s ratio. Better to let some of the guilty go free than look for healing in a judicial system designed to sacrifice the innocent.

~ Meg Mott is professor of politics emerita at Emerson College.

Why revisions to Title IX are good for democracy (opinion) (insidehighered.com)

Categories
Domestic Violence Media Press Release

PR: SAVE Denounces President Obama’s Misleading Portrayal of Domestic Violence

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Gina Lauterio
Email: glauterio@saveservices.org

SAVE Denounces President Obama’s Misleading Portrayal of Domestic Violence

WASHINGTON / February 10, 2015 – A leading domestic violence organization is criticizing President Obama for use of highly misleading claims on domestic violence. In a taped message to viewers of the Grammy awards Sunday night, President Obama called for an end to “violence against women and girls.” The President did not mention the problem of domestic violence against men and boys, even though males are equally likely to be victims of female-perpetrated abuse.

The problem of female-perpetrated violence has been documented in hundreds of studies. A research summary by Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling, PhD of the University of South Alabama reported that females were more likely than males to be the perpetrators of unidirectional violence, by a two-to-one margin.

One compilation of 286 scholarly investigations concludes, “women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners:” http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

SAVE has previously requested the Obama Administration to rely on accurate information in its domestic violence efforts: http://www.saveservices.org/camp/biased-briefing/biden-the-view/

In December the Department of Justice reported that each year, less than one percent of college women are victims of sexual assault. Nonetheless, the White House website still displays a Fact Sheet that states, “One in five women is sexually assaulted in college:” http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/04/29/fact-sheet-not-alone-protecting-students-sexual-assault

“Victims of partner abuse are not served by deceptive misrepresentations of the truth,” notes SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “Administration officials should assure that anti-abuse programs are based on fact, reason, and science, not gender ideology.”

SAVE has compiled Seven Key Facts About Domestic Violence: http://www.saveservices.org/key-facts/

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Categories
Accountability CAMP Discrimination Domestic Violence Media Press Release Victims

PR: Chicken Ads Reveal Abuse Double-Standard, SAVE Charges

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Teri Stoddard
Telephone: 301-801-0608
Email: tstoddard@saveservices.org

Chicken Ads Reveal Abuse Double-Standard, SAVE Charges

WASHINGTON / August 20, 2013 – A leading victim-advocacy organization is calling on Kentucky Fried Chicken to remove advertisements that depict a woman violently slapping a man. Stop Abusive and Violent Environments — SAVE — charges the ads endorse a double-standard which condemns violence against women, but views violence against men as acceptable and even comical.

A KFC spokesperson has claimed the abusive spots represent “tongue-in-cheek humor.” The controversial ad can be seen here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRH9NBcd33k .

Columnist Barbara Kay devotes her August 13 column to the commercials. “There was a time when it was believed that women were never violent by nature,” she explains. “But we know now that domestic violence is a two-way street… it is time our culture stopped finding female on male violence an appropriate vehicle for comedy.” http://princearthurherald.com/en/culture-2/barbara-kay-kfcs-hot-shot-bites-ad-campaign-leaves-me-cold-3

The slap-ads have triggered an international outcry. Persons from 28 countries have signed a petition condemning the KFC ads for promoting “dangerous stereotypes.” http://www.change.org/petitions/kentucky-fried-chicken-stop-making-light-of-domestic-violence

Facebook commentaries were much more pointed, calling KFC “sexist” and saying the company would never produce an ad making light of male-on-female violence.

“KFC executives should be hanging their heads in shame,” notes SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “They still don’t get it – there’s no excuse for domestic violence whether it affects a man or woman.”

A major research compilation shows female-perpetrated partner violence is more widespread than male-perpetrated violence — 28.3% vs. 21.6%: http://domesticviolenceresearch.org/

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Categories
Accountability Domestic Violence Media Press Release Victims Violence

PR: Domestic Violence Still Affects Millions, But KFC Insists Gender Violence in Ads is Harmless ‘Humor’

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Teri Stoddard
Telephone: 301-801-0608
Email: tstoddard@saveservices.org

Domestic Violence Still Affects Millions, But KFC Insists Gender Violence in Ads is Harmless ‘Humor’ 

WASHINGTON / August 15, 2013 – Kentucky Fried Chicken (KFC) is currently running advertisements that feature a woman violently slapping a man: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRH9NBcd33k . Following numerous complaints, KFC continues to show the ads, and now claims the spots represent “tongue-in-cheek humor.”

The KFC announcement follows release of a major research compilation that shows that female-perpetrated violence is more widespread than male-perpetrated violence (28.3% vs. 21.6%). The compilation also reveals that police often fail to arrest female perpetrators of domestic violence.

The research was conducted by the Partner Abuse State of Knowledge (PASK) project, a summary of over 1,700 research studies on domestic violence and partner abuse: http://domesticviolenceresearch.org/

The KFC slap-ads have triggered widespread commentary and controversy.

Award-winning columnist Barbara Kay tweeted on August 10, “KFC finds humor in women slapping men. Sorry, humor in either sex slapping the other is so ‘over.’”

One petition charges the KFC ads perpetuate “dangerous stereotypes” that violence against men can be considered a “joke:” http://www.change.org/petitions/kentucky-fried-chicken-stop-making-light-of-domestic-violence

The National Coalition for Men wonders whether the violence-filled ads are making chickens “blush with shame:” http://ncfm.org/2013/08/news/uncategorized/kfc-uses-violence-against-men-to-sell-chicken-pathetic/

“Kentucky Fried Chicken is trying to sell chicken by pushing the sick idea that violence against men is not only acceptable, it’s even funny,” notes SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “That’s shameful, and it’s wrong.”

SAVE has launched a national public awareness campaign based on the PASK research to assure no victim of gender violence is ever ignored, ridiculed, or turned away: http://www.saveservices.org/camp/kfc/

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

Categories
Domestic Violence False Allegations Innocence Law Enforcement Media Press Release Prosecutorial Misconduct Sexual Assault Wrongful Convictions

PR: How Well is the Media Covering the Kellett Prosecutor Scandal?, SAVE Asks

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Teri Stoddard
Telephone: 301-801-0608
Email: tstoddard@saveservices.org

How Well is the Media Covering the Kellett Prosecutor Scandal?, SAVE Asks

WASHINGTON / May 14, 2013 – Three weeks ago a state ethics board issued a long-awaited report highly critical of Hancock Co. prosecutor Mary Kellett. Now a victim advocacy group is asking, Why have only two local media outlets covered the historic story?

Following a two-year investigation, the report is viewed as historic because the Maine Board of Overseers of the Bar, charged with enforcing legal ethics codes, has never previously recommended the disbarment of a standing prosecutor.

On April 24, 2013 the ethics panel released a report showing assistant district attorney Mary N. Kellett ignored a court order, suppressed evidence, misled the jury, and engaged in “conduct unworthy of an attorney.”  The report petitions the Maine Supreme Judicial Board to impose “appropriate disciplinary sanction” on ADA Kellett (1).

But three weeks later, only two media outlets, WABI TV and the Bangor Daily News, have provided coverage of the milestone story (2, 3).

SAVE notes the Kellett investigation has garnered extensive national media attention. Following release of the April 24 ethics report, two lengthy editorials appeared in national venues: “Discipline Case Against Prosecutor Mary Kellett Heating Up” (4) and “Filler Case Nearing Conclusion, Perhaps” (5). Over 10,000 persons have viewed accounts of the story on social media pages, as well.

SAVE invites reporters, editors, producers, and other media representatives to review the timeline of events (6), which raises the worrisome question of whether ADA Kellett charged the wrong person with the crime.

“When a Hancock County man was charged with spousal assault, media outlets provided wall-to-wall coverage,” notes SAVE spokesman Howard Goldman. “But when an overly zealous prosecutor is found guilty on multiple counts of unethical conduct, local media outlets seem to dawdle.”

SAVE filed a 9-page ethics complaint in 2011 alleging numerous instances of prosecutor misconduct (7). Over 1,400 persons have signed a petition calling for the disbarment of the prosecutor (8).

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

  1. http://www.saveservices.org/2013/05/pr-ethics-board-issues-rebuke-of-hancock-co-prosecutor-mary-kellett/
  2. http://www.wabi.tv/news/39920/state-ethics-boards-issues-report-on-hancock-county-prosecutor
  3. http://bangordailynews.com/2013/05/13/news/hancock/oversight-panel-files-complaint-against-hancock-county-prosecutor-with-state-supreme-court/
  4. http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/2013/05/09/discipline-case-against-prosecutor-mary-kellett-heating-up/
  5. http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism/government-tyranny/filler-case-nearing-conclusion-perhaps/
  6. http://www.saveservices.org/camp/intolerable-injustice/
  7. http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/COMPLA1.pdf
  8. http://www.change.org/petitions/disbar-asst-district-attorney-mary-kellett-for-prosecutorial-misconduct
Categories
CAMP Domestic Violence Media Press Release Violence Violence Against Women Act

Press Release: SAVE Calls on Anti-Violence Groups to Renounce Shaming Campaign

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Teri Stoddard
Telephone: 301-801-0608
Email: tstoddard@saveservices.org

SAVE Calls on Anti-Violence Groups to Renounce Shaming Campaign

WASHINGTON / February 27, 2013 – A leading victim-advocacy organization is calling on domestic violence groups to renounce the shaming attacks and misleading claims by groups claiming to be advocates for passage the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). SAVE, an advocate for services for all victims of domestic violence, says such unfounded accusations invite ridicule and serve to discredit the movement to curb intimate partner abuse.

The Huffington Post has previously criticized harsh attacks on House GOP leadership regarding the VAWA reauthorization as “incendiary and extreme” (1).

Yesterday a group called “Friends of VAWA Coalition” issued a press release headlining the Republican VAWA proposal as being “nothing less than shameful.” (2)

The release claims the bill recently proposed by House Republicans would “deny critical services to many victims.” But SAVE’s review of the GOP bill did not identify any provisions that would restrict services for any group. One Republican aide specifically stated, “The House bill protects all people from discrimination.” (3)

The Friends of VAWA Coalition also charges the GOP bill leaves Native American women “without vital protections” because it allows the defendant to request the case be transferred to a federal court to assure constitutional rights. But Senator Patrick Leahy, lead author of the Senate VAWA bill, has termed such a provision to be “reasonable; a middle ground position regarding tribal jurisdiction.” (4)

“As a woman, I’m saddened and embarrassed that groups purporting to be working for safe families would resort to such extreme rhetoric,” notes SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “These mindless attacks only reinforce the worst stereotypes about females.”

A recent report from the Independent Women’s Forum highlights numerous problems with VAWA (5). A national survey found two-thirds of registered voters favored major reforms to the Violence Against Women Act (6).

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org  

  1. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/06/violence-against-women-act-eric-cantor-native-americans_n_2251924.html
  2. http://www.civilrights.org/press/2013/republican-vawa-proposal.html
  3. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/02/22/vawa-2013_n_2742096.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000003
  4. http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/senator-leahy-welcomes-constructive-new-house-gop-proposal_on-tribal-violence-as-he-pushes-for-final-action-on-vawa-
  5. http://www.iwf.org/publications/2790645/The-Violence-Against-Women-Act
  6. http://www.saveservices.org/campaign-2012/national-survey-on-vawa-reform/
Categories
Bills Campus Domestic Violence Media Press Release Research Violence Against Women Act

PR: ‘Incendiary and Extreme:’ SAVE Deplores Vilification Campaign in Wake of Senate Approval of VAWA

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Teri Stoddard
Telephone: 301-801-0608
Email: tstoddard@saveservices.org

‘Incendiary and Extreme:’ SAVE Deplores Vilification Campaign in Wake of Senate Approval of VAWA

WASHINGTON / February 13, 2013 – Following yesterday’s Senate approval of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), advocates for prompt passage of the bill in the House of Representatives have launched a high-pressure campaign designed to portray Republicans as unsympathetic to the plight of domestic violence victims.

Within hours of Senate approval of the bill, a group called UltraViolet issued a statement announcing its strategy in bold-faced type: “If we can spread the word that House conservatives are blocking legislation to reduce domestic violence because ‘it’s not fair to men,’ we can create a political firestorm no politician will want to get caught up in.”

A press release from the National Organization for Women claims a “radical fringe” controls the Republican leadership and that majority leader Eric Cantor would continue his “shameful efforts” to delay passage of the bill. The N.O.W. statement includes an emotional claim about daily “burnings” of women.

The Huffington Post has previously denounced the N.O.W. attacks on Cantor as “incendiary and extreme” (1).

Last week the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee put out an alert demanding that Senate Republicans “abandon their War on Women and fund the Violence Against Women Act.” The DSCC message did not mention the fact that Democratic and Republican bills have recommended identical funding levels for VAWA.

Numerous groups have questioned the effectiveness of VAWA-funded programs:

— Concerned Women for America, the nation’s largest public policy group for women, notes in a recent editorial, “VAWA has morphed into a series of rigid and ineffective law enforcement programs” (2).

— The Independent Women’s Forum’s Fact Sheet on VAWA warns, “The criminal justice approaches funded by VAWA may be harming the very victims they were intended to protect” (3).

— A recent report documents VAWA-funded restraining orders, mandatory arrest, and aggressive prosecution policies can increase partner violence (4).

“I’ve never seen this level of fanatical name-calling,” says SAVE spokesperson Sheryle Hutter. “Instead of engaging in intimidation and bullying tactics, these groups should be thanking the courageous lawmakers who are willing to look at the facts, ask hard questions, and propose new ways to protect victims.”

Over 40 leading scientists and organizations have questioned VAWA’s ideological basis and endorsed major reforms to the law: http://www.saveservices.org/pvra/vawa-reform-principles/.

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to domestic violence and sexual assault: www.saveservices.org

(1) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/12/06/violence-against-women-act-eric-cantor-native-americans_n_2251924.html
(2) http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/8/nance-why-congress-ought-ditch-vawa/#ixzz2KKZBAdoI
(3) http://iwf.org/publications/2790517/FACT-SHEET:-Violence-Against-Women-Act
(4) http://www.saveservices.org/2013/02/the-violence-against-women-act-is-a-deadly-proposition/

Categories
Media

SAVE Announces Resignation

WASHINGTON — SAVE announces that Natasha Spivack, member of the SAVE Board of Directors, will be resigning her position due to other professional responsibilities. Her resignation will be effective June 1, 2012. Ms. Spivack has served as a member of the SAVE Board of Directors since the organization’s founding in 2009.

Ms. Spivack is known as a powerful advocate for due process and fairness in the American legal system.

“Born in the former Soviet Union, Natasha saw first-hand how a society can abandon civil rights in the name of accommodating an ideological cause. Her warmth, humor, and many contributions as a SAVE board member will be greatly missed,” notes SAVE spokesman Philip W. Cook.

Categories
Bills Media Press Release Violence Violence Against Women Act

PR: SAVE Chides Media for ‘Sound-Bite’ Coverage of Abuse Bill

PRESS RELEASE

Contact: Teri Stoddard
Email: tstoddard@saveservices.org

SAVE Chides Media for ‘Sound-Bite’ Coverage of Abuse Bill

Washington, DC/March 21, 2012 – Media accounts of the Violence Against Women Act bill, currently being debated in the U.S. Senate, are focusing largely on the political horse-race, charges victim-advocacy group Stop Abusive and Violent Environments (SAVE). This “sound-bite” coverage of the abuse issue glosses over the substantive problems and does a disservice to victims, SAVE alleges.

For example, a March 15 CNN story consisted of a point-for-point recitation of Senators’ talking points, providing little context for understanding the debate (1).

An article published in the Washington Post (2) failed to address any of the substantive concerns identified by Women Against VAWA Excess, including evidence that aggressive law-enforcement policies can escalate violence and place women at risk (3).

A recent letter by Concerned Women for America cited a statement by Angela Moore Parmley, Ph.D. that “We have no evidence to date that VAWA has led to a decrease in the overall levels of violence against women.” (4) But media accounts have largely ignored questions of program effectiveness.

Leading civil rights advocate Wendy Kaminer recently published an article in The Atlantic titled “What’s Wrong with the Violence Against Women Act?” (5) Kaminer criticizes VAWA for becoming a “prescription for false convictions.” But media coverage has skirted discussion of VAWA’s impact on the civil liberties of the accused.

In contrast, a March 14 article in the New York Times provided substantive and thoughtful coverage of the issues surrounding the VAWA reauthorization bill (6).

Media coverage has generally ignored the problem of violence against men, even though a recent Centers for Disease Control report found women were more likely to initiate partner violence than men.

“Domestic violence is too important an issue to concede the debate only to the politicians. In some parts of the country, victims have to wait three months to get into an abuse shelter,” reveals SAVE director Philip Cook. “Have elected officials considered how overly-broad definitions of abuse are contributing to the problem? We think not, and that’s why the media needs to do its homework in covering the issue.”

SAVE has developed a number of Special Reports that analyze and document a number of shortcomings with the present law: http://www.saveservices.org/reports

Stop Abusive and Violent Environments is a victim-advocacy organization working for evidence-based solutions to partner violence: www.saveservices.org.

  1. CNN. Accusations Fly in Senate over Violence Against Women Act. http://www.cnn.com/2012/03/15/politics/senate-vawa-accusations/index.html
  2. Female Senators Push to Reauthorize Violence Against Women Act. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/2chambers/post/female-senators-push-to-reauthorize-violence-against-women-act/2012/03/15/gIQAHuOYES_blog.html
  3. WAVE. Is the Violence Against Women Act Really Pro-Woman? http://womenagainstvawa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/03/Flyer-VAWA-Pro-Woman.pdf
  4. Concerned Women for America. Letter to Senators. Feb. 1, 2012. http://www.saveservices.org/wp-content/uploads/CWA-VAWALtr.2.1.2012.pdf
  5. Kaminer W. What’s Wrong with the Violence Against Women Act? The Atlantic. March 2012.
  6. Women Figure Anew in Senate’s Latest Battle. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/15/us/politics/violence-against-women-act-divides-senate.html