Model Domestic Violence Policy for Counties

Guiding Principles

Return to Contents

The four primary goals in developing or strengthening a community's response to the problem of adult domestic violence are:

1. Victim Safety and Self-determination
2. Abuser Accountability
   
3. Systems' Responsibility
   
4. Promoting a Coordinated Response Grounded in the Principles of Zero Tolerance
   

The Guiding Principles are the universal benchmarks by which programs, policies, protocols, and procedures across all systems (both formal and informal) can be measured to assess the extent to which they support the above-stated goals. The following principles are not intended to be an exhaustive list of evaluative measures, but rather to serve as a solid starting point to guide the work of counties.

This policy provides further recommendations specific to Employers and the following formal systems: the Criminal Justice, Legal and Judicial; Health Care; Substance Abuse Treatment; Child Welfare; Mental Health; and Education. There are, however, many potential formal and informal helping systems-community-based agencies, women's centers, departments of social services, religious institutions and communities of faith, child care centers, neighborhood groups, and homeless housing networks, to name a few-that are not specifically focused on in this policy, but for whom the following Guiding Principles should provide significant information and guidance regarding their responses to domestic violence.

1. VICTIM SAFETY AND SELF-DETERMINISM
   
   By far, the most important goal in developing systems' and community responses to adult domestic violence is enhancing victim safety. Essential to furthering this goal is the acknowledgment that battered women encounter many obstacles to achieving safety or to ending a relationship with an abusive partner, and the choices they confront are not risk-free. For example, while there may be risks attached to staying with an abusive partner, there are also risks attached to separating from an abusive partner, such as the risks of escalated threats and physical violence, continued harassment, and stalking. While calling the police or seeking an order of protection from the courts are options available to battered women, there is also the risk that an abusive partner will attempt to retaliate against the victim for having involved the courts or the criminal justice system.
   
   Seeking help, getting an order of protection, or deciding to leave an abusive partner only makes sense to a woman when, on balance, it reduces the overall risks that she and her children have to deal with. Safety interventions should reflect the reality that there are risks attached to every decision a battered woman makes, and should be designed to evaluate the risks and benefits of different options and to identify ways to reduce the risks.
   
   The interests of victim safety should remain paramount even when there may be a perceived benefit of a program, policy, protocol, or procedure to some other interest. For example, in a mental health setting, it might be perceived that victim reports of violence could be used to more effectively confront the denial of an abuser. The solicitation and/or use of victim reports in intervening with abusers, however, increases the risk of retaliatory violence by the abuser, and should therefore be avoided whenever possible.
   
   The following Guiding Principles aim not only to protect victims from further harm by their abusive partners, but to also protect them from further victimization by "the system." The following principles therefore encourage the development of responses that refrain from explicit or implicit victim blaming, affirm the adult victim's right to self-determination, and set realistic and reasonable expectations of both victims and providers within the relevant systems.
   
   
   1. The goal of interventions with victims is SAFETY from physical, emotional, financial, and psychological harm, regardless of whether a victim is choosing to continue in a relationship with the abusive partner or not. Leaving an abusive partner may be an option a victim chooses at some point in her safety planning process, but leaving is not the appropriate goal of intervention.
      
      The reasons for this principle are twofold. First, many victims want the violence to stop, but do not want the relationship to end. In order to support a victim's right to self-determination, interventions should be fashioned to be consistent with a victim's personal goals.
      
      Second, abusers often escalate their violence during times of separation, increasing a victim's risk of harm, including serious and life-threatening injury. Separated or divorced women are 14 times more likely than married women to report being assaulted by a spouse or ex-spouse.(11) Furthermore, two-thirds of women killed by their male partners are killed when they are in the process of leaving or after they have already left.(12) The risk of escalated threats and physical harm often extends beyond the victim to others, including her children, friends, family members, and professionals from whom she may seek assistance. For a victim who chooses to separate from her partner, providers should be prepared to assist her in making a separation safety plan to help reduce the risks to herself and others.
      
      Evaluating leaving as an option requires an honest and rigorous assessment of the risks attached. Providers should recognize that, at any given point, making the choice to stay with an abusive partner is often the most rational choice a victim can make to protect herself and others.
      
      
   2. Intervention strategies with victims should be based on an empowerment model, actively supporting each victim's right to self-determination. This means that interventions should focus on helping victims explore and evaluate available options, make informed decisions, and design personal safety plans that reflect the victim's stated needs and goals. This includes providing information about available services and facilitating a victim's voluntary involvement in available services. It would not include mandating conditions for the provision of assistance to the victim, or (when within the provider's authority) mandating her involvement in services. A victim's right to self-determination may be limited when, in the provider's professional judgment, the victim's actions pose serious, foreseeable, and imminent risk to self or others.
      
      An empowerment model is the preferred framework for interventions with victims of domestic violence. Battered women are adults who are making difficult choices in difficult circumstances. Victims themselves are most often in the best position to accurately evaluate the impact of various options on their safety. Further, every victim must make decisions that she can live with. For example, for some victims, divorce is unacceptable; for non-English speaking victims, moving to a new community or a shelter where no one speaks their language or understands their culture may not be an option.
      
      In addition, victims of domestic violence are victims of their partners' coercive control. One of the goals of intervention is to restore the victim's control over her own life. It is important, therefore, not to make decisions for her or to make personal judgments about her actions. Supporting a victim's decisions, however, does not relieve a provider of the professional responsibility to share information, including professional judgments about a particular decision or course of action being considered or chosen by the victim. Supporting a victim's right to make her own decisions, and offering a professional opinion about such decisions, are not necessarily incompatible actions.
      
      In cases in which a victim's actions pose serious, foreseeable, and imminent risk to self or others, a provider may be legally bound to limit the victim's right to self-determination. For example, in cases of imminent risk of suicide, homicide, or child abuse, a provider may be legally required to act with or without the victim's consent, by notifying the police, making a report to the State Central Registry regarding child abuse, etc. In cases in which providers are not legally required to act, they may, in fact, have a legal obligation to uphold the victim's right to confidentiality.
      
      
   3. Adult Protective Services should be notified in cases in which victims are physically or mentally impaired to the extent that they are unable to make competent decisions. Such impairment may be due to, for example, age-related dementia, alcohol/other drug addiction, mental disability, mental illness, and/or physical injury or illness. Subsequent intervention strategies should be coordinated with domestic violence service providers when to do so does not violate the confidentiality of the victim.
      
      It is essential that a provider accurately assess mental or physical competency based on sound clinical grounds, and not on the provider's personal or professional opinion about the prudence of an individual victim's decisions. Non-impaired victims often make decisions that conflict with a provider's judgment, however, they not only have the right to make their own decisions, but are in the best position to evaluate the potential risks and benefits associated with their decisions.
      
      Adult Protective Services (APS) exists to intervene in cases in which adults are significantly compromised in their abilities to make competent decisions about themselves or others for whom they are responsible. In these cases, providers should utilize the supports and expertise available through APS, as well as through the local domestic violence service provider.
      
      
   4. All providers should be adequately trained to conduct danger assessments and to assist victims in developing short-term safety plans, but without a combination of advanced training and field experience, providers should refer victims to domestic violence service providers or victim-witness advocates for comprehensive risk assessments and safety planning.
      
      Regardless of what a victim intends to do in response to her partner's abuse, it can be a very helpful safety strategy for her to identify and evaluate risks and construct plans for a variety of different situations-for dealing with a crisis, such as an assault by her partner; for continuing to live with or date her partner; for dealing with the risks associated with separation from her partner; and for maintaining an independent life after a permanent separation, divorce, or the termination of a relationship with her partner. Even the most comprehensive safety plan, however, is not a guarantee that a victim will be safe. Safety planning is a tool for developing safety strategies, not a solution to domestic violence.
      
      In all cases, a safety plan should be the victim's plan, not the provider's plan. The provider's role is to help identify options that the victim may or may not have previously considered, to help the victim weigh the potential benefits and drawbacks of those options, and to marshal all possible resources to assist the victim in implementing the plan that she chooses.
      
      All providers should be prepared to assist a victim in assessing the potential that her partner will physically harm her, particularly during times of separation or when the victim has taken an active step to leave or involve the legal system or other helpers. It is at these times that abusers often escalate their violence. Providers should assist victims in developing short-term safety plans or escape plans in these instances, plans that answer questions such as: What, if anything, can she do to minimize the possibility that her partner will harm her? What can she do if her partner threatens to assault her or does assault her? Who can she call? Does she have a safe place to go? What important papers will she need? Where can she keep some extra money?
      
      In addition to planning for crisis situations, many victims, whether they are considering leaving their partners or not, can attempt to escape or avoid their partner's attacks by developing a comprehensive and detailed safety plan. These plans often incorporate step-by-step goals that a victim accomplishes over an extended period of time to explore alternate options that can increase her range of free choice and action, strengthen her economic independence, build her support network, and improve her emotional and physical health. It is these more extensive, complex, and detailed plans that are best facilitated by a provider with advanced training and field experience, such as a domestic violence service provider or victim-witness advocate.
      
      
   5. Domestic violence service providers should be used as the primary referral resource for addressing the safety-related concerns of victims of domestic violence.
      
      Domestic violence service providers are likely to be the most knowledgeable and experienced service providers in a given community regarding issues related to victim safety. Local domestic violence service providers provide confidential assistance to battered women and their children. They provide emergency safety services including shelter and 24-hour crisis hotlines and, most often, a full range of non-shelter services. Non-residential services are typically free of charge; shelter costs are typically covered by the local department of social services, except for working women and women with access to financial resources, who may be required to contribute financially to their shelter stays.
      
      
   6. Screening for adult domestic violence should be conducted with victims and abusers in separate sessions. Where victims are not fluent in English, or are hearing-impaired, providers should arrange for translators or interpreters who are neither friends, nor relatives (including children) of the victim.
      
      In order to safely assess for adult domestic violence, a victim should never be asked domestic violence screening questions in the presence of her partner, for to do so puts her at risk of retaliation for what she may or may not say. If the gender of the client's partner is not known, providers should use gender-neutral language in assessing for domestic violence, i.e., "Does your partner make threats to hurt you or other family members?"
      
      In cases in which there are language barriers, protecting victim safety includes avoiding the use of family members as interpreters/translators and making it a priority to locate interpreters/translators who have some knowledge of domestic violence.
      
      
   7. Before conducting a screening for domestic violence with a potential victim, providers should inform the concerned party of the extent and limits of confidentiality. In particular, the concerned party should be informed of the provider's need to act in cases in which s/he expresses an intent to do harm to self or others, and, if the provider is a mandated reporter of child abuse, in cases in which reportable information of child abuse and/or neglect is shared.
      
      A common misperception of victims of domestic violence is that they don't want to disclose information about their partners' abuse. While many victims do make efforts to hide the abuse, they often do so because they fear negative consequences, including fear that their partners will discover that they sought help. An important element in demonstrating your trustworthiness as a "helper", and creating an environment that creates safety for victims to disclose abuse, is to be clear, direct, and up-front about the extent and limits of your confidentiality policy.
      
      
   8. wherever possible, information received from victims should not be directly used in conducting screening and interventions with their abusive partners, even if the victim is willing to provide signed consent.
      
      The use of information provided by victims in interventions with abusers may provide a perceived benefit (for example, using information to confront denial of abusers), but undermines the goal of victim safety. As in the case of family/couples counseling, many women report being threatened or assaulted for information they shared with providers that, in turn, was disclosed to abusers.
      
      In cases in which the use of information provided by victims may be unavoidable (such as Child Protective or law enforcement investigations), providers should give prior notification to the victim of what information is to be shared and when, and engage the victim in planning for her safety.
      
      
   9. Families in which adult domestic violence occurs should not be referred to or engaged in services in which they must cooperatively participate, such as couples, marriage, and family counseling services, or alternative dispute resolution and mediation services.
      
      Intervention strategies that require the cooperative participation of a victim and her abusive partner often presuppose an equal relationship in which both parties are free to openly participate. Mediation, for example, is a process through which equal parties are engaged in negotiations in an effort to resolve a conflict. Victims of domestic violence who, by definition, are being controlled by their partners, are significantly compromised in their ability to negotiate freely and on equal footing. Because of the inherent imbalance of power between an abuser and a victim, mediation is contraindicated in domestic violence cases.
      
      Similarly, couples and marriage counseling often presuppose the ability of both parties to freely participate. These interventions, however, have the potential to increase the likelihood that the abuser will physically or emotionally harm the victim. Many women report being threatened or assaulted after joint intake or counseling sessions for things they said or did during the session.
      
      In addition to the increased danger these practices may create for battered women, such practices also reinforce the notion that a victim shares (at least in part) some responsibility for solving the problem of her partner's violent and/or controlling behavior. Such a message reinforces the mistaken belief that many abusive men already hold, i.e., that their partners are to blame for their violence, and encourages victims to internalize responsibility for their partners' violence.
      
      As with any available option that has known risks, it is important for providers to be prepared to share information with a victim about the risks and limitations of utilizing services that require joint participation with her partner so that she is able to make an informed decision about whether or not to utilize such services.
      
      
   10. Screening for child abuse and neglect, and interventions designed to protect the safety interests of children, should always be accompanied by screening and interventions specifically designed to identify adult domestic violence and to mobilize resources to enhance the safety of adult victims.
       
       As national data readily confirms, there is a significant correlation between partner violence and child abuse and neglect, with domestic violence surfacing as one of the leading risk factors with regard to the physical and emotional safety of children.(13) At least two studies found that between 45-59% of substantiated child abuse cases included documented violence against the mother.(14) In families in which both problems exist, most frequently the adult male head of household is the sole perpetrator of abuse.(15) Furthermore, there is a significant overlap between men who abuse their female partners and men who perpetrate child sexual abuse, with girls being 5-6 times more likely to be sexually abused by domestically violent fathers than by non-battering fathers.(16)
       
       Responding effectively to cases in which there is an adult victim and child victim(s) requires parallel responses that protect children and that provide safety-related assistance to their mothers. It has been demonstrated that strategies designed to help battered mothers get safe are effective strategies for protecting the safety interests of children. Providing safety-related assistance to a battered mother strengthens her ability to provide for the safety needs of her children and should, therefore, be an integral part of interventions designed to protect children in homes in which there is adult domestic violence.
       
       
   11. Providers should be prepared to respond to the particular needs of victims with regard to factors such as socio-economic status, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, religious affiliation, physical and mental disabilities, immigrant status, education, employment status, urban vs. rural residency, and marital status.
       
       While it is not feasible for providers to have a comprehensive understanding of the social, cultural, ethnic, or religious affiliation of every victim with whom they have contact, it is essential that they be prepared to acknowledge, legitimize, and accept the ways in which these factors may influence an individual victim's behavior and choices. (See Problem Statement, Diversity of Victims' Experiences.)
       
       For example, the forced imprisonment of Japanese and other Asian civilians in wartime internment camps might be relevant to a particular Asian victim's distrust of "the system." For immigrant women from countries operated under military rule or an authoritarian regime, an understandable fear of law enforcement and "state-run" systems may be a substantial barrier to intervention. Even for many U.S.-born women of color, experiences with institutionalized racism may cause them to be wary of involving "the system." Similarly, institutionalized heterosexism may create obstacles to gay men and lesbians seeking assistance. Many of the options generally available for victims of domestic violence might not be seen as viable by victims from these groups, although there is often a significant variation of responses among individuals from the same cultural, racial, or religious group.
       
       
       
2. ABUSER ACCOUNTABILITY
   
   Men who are abusive use emotional, psychological, economic, sexual, and physical abuse in order to control their intimate partners. Domestic violence does not result from individual personal or moral deficits, diseases, diminished intellect, addiction, mental illness, poverty, other persons' behaviors, or external events. Abusers act from a set of attitudes and beliefs about how men and women should relate in intimate relationships. In general, abusers believe that they have a right to enforce their will on their female partners. This belief, rooted in sexism and misogyny, is supported and tolerated by the society in which we live, a society that has historically condoned the use of violence against women.
   
   Abuser accountability is possible only when there is an ability to impose swift, consistent, and meaningful sanctions for the abusive behavior, a role that rests primarily, if not exclusively, within the justice system, through arrest, prosecution and sentences of incarceration, probation, restitution or fine, or some combination of these. Batterers Intervention Programs (BIPs), where they exist, should be used by the courts only in combination with other legal sanctions, as part of a coordinated disposition that also includes incarceration, probation, restitution, or a fine. Further, while BIPs can be a useful element of a community coordinated response, they are not a necessary element of such a response. (See definition of Batterers Intervention Program.)
   
   This policy cautions against the use of Batterers Intervention Programs as a referral for non-mandated clients. Many abusers self-refer to BIPs in order to convince their partners to stay with them or to return if they have already left, a powerful and often effective form of emotional manipulation. As a result, non-mandated abusers may have an even greater ability than mandated abusers to misuse their participation in a BIP as a way to reinforce their control over their victims. Further, non-mandated participation does not achieve the goal of holding abusers accountable since non-mandated participants are subject to no consequences for non-compliance with the program requirements.
   
   Within systems other than the criminal and civil justice systems, providers should actively support the justice system's role in holding abusers accountable. In addition, providers can and should reinforce individual abusers' sole responsibility for their abusive behavior. The combination of abuser accountability within the criminal and civil justice systems and a coordinated community response of zero tolerance for abusive behavior is the recommended strategy for stopping men's violence against women.
   
   A comprehensive coordinated community response requires the active participation of both the formal systems (criminal and civil justice, health care, social and human services) and informal community systems (civic, cultural, religious, ethnic, etc.) in holding abusers accountable through legal sanctions, and reinforcing abusers' responsibility for their behavior through social sanctions. However, even with the best efforts of the systems and community at large, there is no guarantee that abusers will choose to stop their abusive behavior, underscoring the importance of the criminal and civil justice systems' roles in exerting immediate and ongoing legal control over abusers.
   
   The following Guiding Principles are founded on the recognition that men who are abusive achieve and maintain control over their partners by using culturally condoned violence and abuse, and on the understanding that abusive behavior is the sole responsibility of the individual abuser. An abuser's choice to perpetrate violence and his capacity to stop his violence is completely independent of the actions of his victim. Therefore, interventions to promote abuser accountability should be directed solely at the abuser through the application of legal and social sanctions for his violent behavior. Further, specific intervention strategies with abusers should always be evaluated on the basis of whether or not they enhance victim safety.
   
   
   
   1. Providers should use all of the leverage and authority available to them to hold abusers accountable for their abusive behavior by imposing appropriate consequences. Such responses should be swift, consistent, foreseeable, and commensurate.
      
      Abusers are coercive and violent because they can do so with impunity and because the behavior works to control their female partners. It is the community's responsibility-not the responsibility of victims-to hold abusers accountable. Providers should, therefore, use all available means to hold abusers accountable for their abusive behavior, and should act swiftly and consistently. Ideally, systems' responses to domestic violence should be well thought out, expressed in writing, and widely publicized to the community. In this way, consequences are more likely to be known to the abuser as well.
      
      
   2. Providers' responses to perpetrators of domestic violence should focus solely on the abusive behaviors and reinforce abusers' sole responsibility for their coercive and violent behavior.
      
      There are no acceptable excuses for domestic violence. When a system or community "buys into" abusers' excuses, it results in collusion, which allows abusers to avoid responsibility for their abuse. Responses that focus on personal or moral deficits, diseases, low self-esteem, early childhood experiences, anger management, diminished intellect, addiction, mental illness, other persons, or external events, as the means to "solving" domestic violence, give abusers support for the excuses they offer to explain their abusive behavior and undermine abusers' ability to achieve insight about their capacity to stop their abuse against their partners.
      
      Engagement in or referrals to alcohol/other drug treatment programs, mental health services, anger management programs, or psychiatric care facilities should not be used as responses to abusers' violent behavior, although such referrals may be indicated as a response to other issues in addition to the appropriate criminal or civil justice sanctions for the violent behavior.
      
      
   3. Providers who have a legal duty to warn, should take appropriate steps to protect the intended victim when they have direct knowledge of an abuser's intent to do harm to that intended victim.
      
      Abusers' threats should be taken very seriously and responded to swiftly, predictably, and consistently. When there is firsthand knowledge of an abuser's threat to do harm, the intended victim and the police must be notified immediately and the victim should be given the local domestic violence hotline number and offered assistance with safety planning.
      
      
   4. Providers' responses should include ways to facilitate the documentation and provision of relevant information to the courts regarding the effects of domestic violence on children.
      
      Pursuant to Chapter 85 of the Laws of 1996, New York State courts are required to consider the effects of domestic violence as a factor in custody and visitation decisions. It is impossible for courts to determine the best interests of children and to make fully informed decisions about custody and visitation without full and accurate information. Thorough information gathering and accurate documentation can assist the court in deciding custody and visitation cases if such records are subpoenaed by the court.
      
      Research suggests that adult domestic violence may be the primary familial context for child abuse,(17) with the adult male abuser perpetrating abuse on the female partner as well as the children in the household. Further, children who witness adult domestic violence suffer a range of potentially serious effects including somatic problems such as failure to thrive, gastrointestinal distress, headaches, insomnia and bed wetting, behavioral difficulties, and declines in academic performance. As teenagers, these children are more likely than other teens to be involved with alcohol/other drugs, criminal activity, and prostitution. They also comprise a disproportionate number of teen parents and homeless youth.(18)
      
      
      
3. SYSTEMS' RESPONSIBILITY
   
   Despite the significant number of victims and children served each year through the domestic violence service system, it is clear that this represents only a relatively small proportion of all victims who seek help in New York State. In fact, most battered women who enter emergency domestic violence shelters report having made multiple attempts to seek help from other systems-health care, criminal or civil justice, schools, and human services including public assistance, housing, and employment training-prior to their request for assistance from local domestic violence services. In many cases, domestic violence remains unidentified by professionals working in these various service systems. For example, it is estimated that domestic violence is identified in only about one in ten cases in which a victim presents to the health care system with a violence-related injury or illness.(19)
   
   An increased rate of identification of domestic violence,coupled with an appropriate response from providers working within these systems, is an essential secondary prevention strategy because of its potential to prevent further harm. The following Guiding Principles are based on the belief that providers across all systems need to develop policies, protocols, and programs to effectively identify and appropriately respond to domestic violence and that they should have adequate knowledge and preparation to implement such policies, protocols, and programs.
   
   
   1. Providers should actively seek training on domestic violence from experts in the field including local domestic violence service providers, the New York State Coalition Against Domestic Violence, the New York State Spanish Domestic Violence Hotline, the New York State Office for the Prevention of Domestic Violence, and Pace University Battered Women's Justice Center. Training should be required not only for front line staff, but for management, policy makers, human resources personnel, and security staff.
      
      In order to develop effective policies, protocols, and programs and to have the ability to implement them effectively, providers need to have accurate, state-of-the-art information about domestic violence. Minimally, such training should prepare staff to assess for domestic violence, assist identified victims in safety planning, make appropriate referrals, and individualize responses in recognition of the physical, social, and cultural realities that may impact an individual victim's situation, in particular, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, age, religious affiliation, physical and mental disabilities, immigrant status, and urban vs. rural residency. To be effective, training should be comprehensive and ongoing.
      
      
   2. Interagency cross-training should occur between and among providers from systems that have interrelated services.
      
      In addition to having accurate information about domestic violence and about the range of services for victims available in the community, providers need accurate information about other systems with which they interact. For example, the health care system is required to notify the police in domestic violence cases that involve injuries resulting from gunshots or stabbings. Understanding the role and responsibility of police in these cases will facilitate effective handling.
      
      Similarly, substance abuse treatment providers may treat mandated clients who are on probation or parole. A solid understanding by substance abuse treatment providers of the roles and responsibilities of probation and parole will strengthen their abilities to effectively coordinate responses.
      
      
   3. In conjunction with domestic violence service providers, providers across all systems should develop policies and protocols for responding to both victims of domestic violence and abusers, should commit the policies/protocols to paper, and should openly share them with other systems and the public.
      
      Openly sharing policies and protocols demonstrates community accountability for responding to the problem of domestic violence and a willingness to modify responses if necessary.
      
      
   4. Providers across all systems should be adequately supervised and held accountable for their participation in implementing their organization's domestic violence policy/protocol.
      
      Mechanisms should be developed to identify, counsel, discipline, or otherwise hold accountable staff whose conduct is inconsistent with organizational policy/protocols, and to provide opportunities for retraining, if necessary. Similarly, organizations should identify incentives and rewards for exemplary performance.
      
      
   5. Providers should establish ways to improve coordination of services with other relevant systems, such as through information-sharing mechanisms, case-tracking systems, case conferencing, and written interagency agreements.
      
      While there are often legal, regulatory, professional, and logistical barriers to openly sharing information, interagency communication mechanisms should maximize the amount of relevant information to be shared without infringing on the privacy and confidentiality rights of the parties involved. Communication mechanisms are essential to ensure that there is consistency and compatibility between court orders, treatment plans, safety plans, and other case plans for individual victims and abusers.
      
      
   6. Providers across all systems should ensure that information about victims that is collected and stored is secure, that appropriate precautions are taken to prevent access by abusers to information about their partners, and that there exist clear and commensurate sanctions for security violations.
      
      Confidentiality is a critical issue for battered women who are often victims of stalking by partners or former partners. One of the ways in which abusers have been successful in locating partners who have fled dangerous situations is through access to public records and/or databases, or by gaining unauthorized access to confidential records. This practice can be thwarted by the effective use of information security measures combined with the imposition of serious sanctions for violations.
      
      
   7. Providers across all systems should actively participate in local Task Forces or Coalitions dedicated to improving a community's coordinated response to domestic violence. The necessary resources (staff time, travel, etc.) should be provided to this effort, and Task Force/Coalition representatives should have the appropriate authority to make participation meaningful.
      
      Many communities have existing Domestic Violence Task Forces or Coalitions made up of representatives of the criminal and civil justice, health care, human services, and educational systems, as well as employers and unions. These Task Force efforts are strengthened by representation from civic, religious, cultural, and ethnic groups and organizations and those representing the needs of lesbians, elders, people with physical and mental disabilities, and undocumented immigrants. The active participation of providers from all of these systems is essential to the creation of effective coordinated responses to the problem of domestic violence.
      
      
      
4. PROMOTING A COORDINATED COMMUNITY RESPONSE GROUNDED IN THE PRINCIPLES OF ZERO TOLERANCE
   
   While the development and implementation of improved responses within formal community systems are primary elements in effecting a coordinated community response to the problem of domestic violence, a strong, clear, consistent, and intolerant response from the entire community is necessary to turn the tide away from the centuries-old ethic of tolerance and support for domestic violence. County and local officials and leaders have tremendous opportunity to engage the larger county community in creating an environment of zero tolerance for domestic violence. The active participation of individuals, groups, and organizations in a coordinated response to domestic violence is an important part of the success of such an effort. Public/private partnerships can further facilitate accomplishment of these goals and the recommendations that follow.
   
   There is a myriad of community "systems" that should be enlisted in an effort to promote a coordinated community response including civic, religious, cultural, and ethnic groups and organizations. In addition, an individual within a community often has many relationships independent of participation or membership in a group or organization, for example, as a neighbor, friend, family member, co-worker, or acquaintance of someone who is affected by domestic violence. Community members have significant influence in their personal relationships to advance the ethic of zero tolerance for domestic violence and should be actively challenged to participate in efforts designed to promote victim safety and reinforce abuser accountability.
   
   The following recommendations are designed to promote the involvement of all members of the community in both responding to and preventing domestic violence.
   
   
   1. County and local officials and leaders involved in local Task Forces or Coalitions dedicated to improving a community's coordinated response to domestic violence should solicit and facilitate the full participation of recognized leaders, including those representing community-based civic, religious, cultural, and ethnic groups and organizations, organizations representing the needs of lesbians, elders, people with physical and mental disabilities, and undocumented immigrants, and representatives of the private sector.
      
      Many communities have existing Domestic Violence Task Forces or Coalitions made up of representatives of the criminal and civil justice, health care, and human services systems. The inclusion of community members who live and work outside of these formal systems is essential to the creation of effective coordinated responses to the problem of domestic violence, as is participation from representatives of the business community. Equally essential is input from the myriad diverse groups that live in a community regarding the particular needs of victims from these groups so that coordinated responses reflect the diversity of victims.
      
      
   2. County and local officials and leaders involved in local Task Forces or Coalitions dedicated to improving a community's coordinated response to domestic violence should solicit and encourage the participation of local television, print, and radio media representatives. They should also encourage the Task Force to develop and provide media outlets with a list of local people who have domestic violence expertise and can serve as media resources.
      
      An important aspect of community education about domestic violence is the way in which the problem is portrayed by the media. Increasing media's access to accurate information will help to ensure that domestic violence is depicted as a serious crime, that it is framed accurately, and that the community's response will be appropriately evaluated. Further, media awareness of the seriousness of domestic violence may increase coverage of domestic violence-related news and may prompt the development of feature stories as well.
      
      
   3. County and local officials and leaders should initiate and sustain domestic violence education and awareness efforts designed to reach the entire county community.
      
      While education and awareness efforts are vitally important to ensure that victims in the community know how and where to find information, support, and services, these efforts are also important to the establishment of a coordinated community response to the problem. County and local officials and leaders should support the education efforts of local domestic violence service providers and should undertake efforts to foster the involvement of every member of the community in assuming a reasonable and achievable role in responding to domestic violence, both personally and professionally. Education efforts are essential to promoting community responsibility for the problem of domestic violence. Such efforts can include the use of radio and TV public service announcements and public access television channels as a useful means to reach a large audience.
      
      
   4. Community members should be engaged in defining community-based strategies for reinforcing abuser responsibility and supporting victims that are consistent with the Guiding Principles put forward in this document, and that strengthen and support the formal systems' responses.
      
      
   5. County and local officials and leaders should develop, implement, and widely publicize a mechanism through which community members can provide evaluative information and suggestions for improvements in the formal systems' responses to domestic violence.
      
      The input of community members regarding the effectiveness of systems' responses is essential in any meaningful effort to evaluate and monitor those responses. Creating and publicizing the availability of a clear and accessible mechanism through which individuals from the community can provide feedback and input not only provides the information needed to further strengthen responses to domestic violence, but also clearly communicates the willingness of public officials and formal systems to be held accountable. An open and public process also minimizes an individual's perceived risk of experiencing negative consequences for speaking out.
      
      
   6. County and local officials and leaders should actively support the development and maintenance of organized responses to domestic violence within diverse informal systems, including the development, printing, and distribution of information on domestic violence and available resources to underserved communities, and should encourage the coordination of these efforts in conjunction with local domestic violence service providers.
      
      While formal systems within a community have a primary responsibility to respond effectively to domestic violence, they are unlikely to fully meet all of the widely varying needs of those affected. In recognition of this reality, community groups and organizations should be supported in their initiatives to develop assistance that either fills gaps in existing formal services or provides what may be a preferable alternative for some victims. For example, in many communities, cultural or religious groups have established support groups for battered women from within those groups. The active support of county and local officials and leaders, along with representatives of the formal systems, is important in expanding the options available to victims and in creating an effective coordinated community response.
      
      
   7. County and local officials and leaders should promote and actively facilitate the provision of domestic violence training for community youth leaders.
      
      While effective intervention in domestic violence cases is considered secondary prevention, it also contributes greatly to primary prevention efforts by modeling actions, based on attitudes and beliefs, that reinforce a zero tolerance ethic. Much more can be done, however, to instill in children and youth attitudes and beliefs that not only reject the beliefs that support men's use of controlling tactics against their intimate partners, but that also promote gender equity.
      
      There are typically many community members who come in regular contact with children through youth clubs, after school programs, child care and pre-school programs, sports programs, etc. These are community members who often become trusted adults to children and to whom these children often turn for information and help. As a result, the actions, attitudes and beliefs of these adults often have tremendous impact on the children with whom they work, play, and interact. Engaging youth leaders in community-wide efforts to respond to domestic violence and facilitating their access to education and training on the problem and on what they can do to help is an important component of a primary prevention strategy.
      
   
   

(11) Harlow, "Female Victims of Violent Crime," U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1991.

(12) Browne, Angela. When Battered Women Kill. New York: The Free Press, 1987.

(13) Harlow, "Female Victims of Violent Crime," U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1991.

(14) Browne, Angela. When Battered Women Kill. New York: The Free Press, 1987.

(15) Bowker, Arbitell & McFerron, "On the Relationship Between Wife Beating and Child Abuse," in Feminist Perspectives on Wife Abuse, eds., Yllö & Bograd. Beverly Hills: Sage Publications, 1987.

(16) Ibid.

(17) Harlow, "Female Victims of Violent Crime," U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1991.

(18) Browne, Angela. When Battered Women Kill. New York: The Free Press, 1987.

(19) Harlow, "Female Victims of Violent Crime," U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, 1991.