Beyond Rope Ladders & Padlocks: A New Approach to Safety Planning

1. Beyond Rope Ladders & Padlocks: A New Approach to Safety Planning Sherry Hamby & Sarah Clark Sewanee, the University of the South Presented at the Ending Domestic & Sexual Violence: Innovations in Practice & Research Conference, Portsmouth, NH, November, 2011 sherry.hamby@sewanee.edu

2. Common Instruments & Tools This review focuses on published instruments and tools. You will see their content is rather narrow. Although many advocates do address these risks, they do so largely without guidance from published documents or the nation’s premier resources on domestic violence.

3. Existing Dangerousness Assessments:Ask Only About Physical Harm • The most frequent topics covered by popular dangerousness/lethality assessment tools are (Laing, 2004; Websdale, 2000) : • prior victimization; • batterer’s drug & alcohol problems; • batterer’s obsessiveness & jealousy; • batterer’s threats to kill the victim or her children; • batterer access to & familiarity with weapons; • batterer’s violence outside the home; • stalking; • batterer’s suicidal ideation & behavior; • partners are separated, or victim is fleeing.

4. A Typical Safety Plan—Nat’l Coalition Against Domestic Violence If you are still in the relationship: Think of a safe place to go if an argument occurs - avoid rooms with no exits (bathroom), or rooms with weapons (kitchen). Think about and make a list of safe people to contact. Keep change with you at all times. Memorize all important numbers. Establish a "code word" or "sign" so that family, friends, teachers or co-workers know when to call for help. Think about what you will say to your partner if he\she becomes violent. Remember, you have the right to live without fear and violence. 4

5. …Focuses on leaving & physical safety If you have left the relationship: Change your phone number. Screen calls. Save and document all contacts, messages, injuries or other incidents involving the batterer. Change locks, if the batterer has a key. Avoid staying alone. Plan how to get away if confronted by an abusive partner. If you have to meet your partner, do it in a public place. Vary your routine. Notify school and work contacts. Call a shelter for battered women. If you leave the relationship or are thinking of leaving, you should take important papers and documents with you to enable you to apply for benefits or take legal action. 5

6. The State of Safety Planning • Bottom line: Many safety plans devote more space to rope ladders and padlocks than to providing guidance on dealing with the financial, legal, and social risks faced by virtually all battered women. • In addition to leaving advocates to figure out how to do this on their own, one at a time, over and over again, what other consequences does this narrow focus have? 6

7. What Gets Left Out of Existing Services?

8. Physical Risks Posed to Others • Concern for others can constrain coping: • Children • Family members • Friends—especially those who offer shelter • Pets • Others, such as coworkers, advocates, etc. • Ex: Across 6 studies, 48% of women in shelters reported their pets had been harmed, 45% said they had been threatened, and 26% said the welfare of their pets delayed their decision to leave (Hamby, in preparation).

9. Financial Risks • Financial dependence is often the most commonly mentioned reason for staying (e.g., Cruz, 2003). • Many areas of potential loss: • Lower standard of living • Loss of savings • Cannot afford neighborhoods with low crime or good schools • Would have to drop out of own schooling • Job loss • Loss of health insurance • Loss of car/transportation • Doesn’t have security deposit, rent, furniture for even a terrible apartment in a terrible neighborhood.

10. Legal Risks • Dual arrests are on the rise (Hirschel & Buzawa, 2002) • Arrest of batterer unlikely to lead to jail time—will be back home & madder than ever • If disclose abuse to authorities, may be reported to CPS for “exposing” children to dv • D-I-V-O-R-C-E risks • Risks losing custody of children • Risks unfair divorce settlement

11. Social Risks • Stigma—Almost all of the social statuses associated with leaving a violent relationship are stigmatized: • “victim” • “divorced” • “single mother” • Loss of friendships, extended family, support of minister/congregants • Children’s loss of friends, schools, sports • May stigmatize entire family in many communities

12. Who Gets Left Out of Existing Services?

13. Not all victims need shelters Denise Richards Brooke Mueller Taylor Armstrong Phil Hartman Rihanna Madonna Tina Turner

14. Not all victims are economically disadvantaged or lacking housing • Celebrities obviously do not represent the norm, but they will have to stand in for all the unknown lawyers, accountants, physicians, psychologists, social workers, nurses, teachers, computer technicians, journalists, artists, physical therapists, veterinarians, and all of the other women who don’t fit the stereotype of “battered woman.”

15. The VIGOR: Multiple Criteria Decision Making for IPV

16. Types of Problems Addressed with MCDM • Selecting routes for nuclear waste transport (Chen, Wang, & Lin, 2008). • Promoting recycling (Gomes et al., 2008) • Understanding stock trading (Albadvi et al., 2007) • Deciding best locations for emergency vehicles (Araz et al., 2007) • Understanding “medical tourism”—when people will decide to have surgery abroad (Bies & Zacharia, 2007) • …and dozens of other applications in environmental sciences, engineering, agriculture, and finance (Hajkowicz, 2008)

17. What Do These Problems Have in Common with Battering? • Multiple facets to the problem • “Success” can be evaluated on multiple criteria • Not all criteria easily evaluated with dollars or some other uniform metric—involve value judgements (originally developed as an alternative to cost-benefit analysis). • Multiple options to choose from, and these options vary in how well they meet different criteria.

18. Using MCDM Principles to Create the VIGOR: Victim Inventory of Goals, Options, & Risks • 6 other experienced advocates reviewed the VIGOR and provided extensive feedback, paid $100 honorarium. • Pilot study with over 100 individuals who have been victims of battering • Students in an undergraduate research seminar helped further streamline and simplify the wording.

19. Pilot Study: Risks, Strengths, Options as Perceived by Victims of Battering • 102 people (98% female) with histories of intimate partner victimization were recruited from 2 domestic violence programs (1 shelter, 1 support group) in 2 Southern states. • Wide age range: 28% 18-25, 25% 26-30, 27% 31-40, 20% 41+ • Ethnically and racially diverse: African-American (54%), White/Caucasian (26%), Hispanic (11%), Native American (9%), and other (1%). • 58% reported income < $12,000 per year. • Most had children (91%), mean 2.14 children per participant. • They provided their perceptions of their risks and resources in a semi-structured format. Responses were coded using a boot-strapping method and analyzed. Participants were given a $25 gift card to thank them for their participation. DV agencies were paid $25 per interview to compensate them for staff time.

20. Step 1: Identify Risks *Concern for children includes concern for their physical, emotional, and social well-being

21. Step 2: Identify Strengths *Personal strength refers to a sense of being capable and having the ability to persevere.

22. Step 3: Identify Options

23. Novel OptionsReported by single or few respondents • Increase internet security (myspace, facebook, email) • Get a dog • Apply for a gun permit • Sleep with a knife under pillow • Find new friends/confidants • Exercise • Change locks (5%)

24. Step 4: Make Choices Based on Risk Priorities & Options • In MCDM, an option has “strict dominance” if it is better than others on some criteria, and at least as good on all others. • The result: NOT a generic checklist of safety precautions, BUT a personalized plan that links coping responses to specific risks. • Fleeing on an emergency basis with few belongings and possibly not even with your children, will not minimize many risks faced by typical battered women.

25. Conclusion • Can improve our response to the most disadvantaged women as help them address multiple needs. • Victims who are seen as poor copers or in “denial” may be prioritizing other risks. • Holistic advocacy, using MCDM, has the potential to considerably broaden the population that seeks help from domestic violence advocates, as many perceive advocacy is primarily about free shelter. • Next steps: Further testing of revised version (Beta 11.0!) with traditional dv agency clients and also hope to evaluate with less disadvantaged women.