Abuse Case Handling Debated

Judges in Orange County Family Court are planning to overhaul their procedures for handling domestic abuse cases in a way that has created apprehension in some shelters for battered women and among family violence experts.

The changes under consideration include ordering some women to attend domestic violence counseling and requiring greater proof of abuse before the judges will grant permanent restraining orders against accused batterers.

“We want to create a new way of looking at domestic violence that truly deals with the problem . . . and helps victims,” said Thomas H. Schulte, one of the family law commissioners spearheading the effort. “We are trying things. If they don’t work, we will try something else.”

Still, some attorneys and counselors who deal with domestic violence worry that the changes, while well-meaning, could make some battered women think twice about seeking restraining orders or using the justice system to get out of abusive relationships.

“My fear is that this could have a chilling effect,” said Jane Shade, a prosecutor who supervises the family violence unit of the district attorney’s office. “Sometimes, domestic abuse cannot be corroborated or proved. One person says it happened, the other person says it didn’t. I don’t know how you deal with that.”

Officials estimate that the changes could affect half the 300 to 500 women who bring domestic violence cases before Family Court each month.

Judges have been quietly discussing the new procedures over the last few months. The Orange County Family Violence Council--consisting of police, prosecutors and representatives of battered women’s shelters and other organizations--has also mulled over the issue.

Schulte declined to detail the specific proposals under consideration, saying the judges “are in the middle of looking at many ideas.” But he emphasized that the court is seeking feedback from those who work in the field.

“We are all aware of the importance of the domestic violence problem and felt it was time to review our procedures and policies,” the commissioner said. “We are open to all suggestions and input from any interested parties. . . . Nothing is cast in stone.”

Shade and other members of the Family Violence Council who have discussed the suggested changes said one key proposal would require counseling for victims who have children and who have resumed living with the batterer.

Some members of the council said they support the general concept but expressed concerns about requiring counseling without first setting a clear curriculum and determining how victims would pay for the sessions.

“I can understand how judges would get frustrated with having the same clients coming in front of them and seeing children going back into violent situations,” said Sandy Condello, executive director of Laura’s House, a shelter serving south Orange County. “But many women cannot afford counseling and the day care they would need for their children.”

The counseling would be similar to the type already offered at battered women’s shelters, designed to boost the self-esteem of domestic violence sufferers and educate them about ways to break out of abusive relationships.

Condello, Shade and others also questioned whether judges would punish victims who refused to seek counseling. Others worry about how battered women might view the requirements.

“We have to make sure that the message they are receiving is not one of re-victimization,” said Fran Shiffman of the Women’s Transitional Living Center. “There could be a misinterpretation that [the victim] is being punished, even though that is certainly not the intent.”

The Family Violence Council’s Shelter Committee has started developing the curriculum for a counseling program “with a positive focus, not from a punitive point of view,” it stated in a report.

Also under consideration by the judges is scrutinizing more closely certain allegations of domestic abuse before issuing permanent restraining orders. Some judges have proposed that officials from the court’s mediation and investigation unit be required to probe the abuse charges between the granting of a temporary restraining order and the issuance of a permanent injunction, which remains in force for three years.

Under state law, those who are the subject of a permanent injunction are prohibited from registering to own a gun, and “you really want to make sure that the people being restricted really deserve that,” said Ken Boyd, a Westminster police detective and Family Violence Council member.

Deputy Dist. Atty. Shade said the nature of some domestic violence cases makes them difficult to prove without exhaustive investigations. “You are talking about checking police reports, getting the 911 calls and looking at photos--if they are available. That takes a lot of time and can cost a lot of money,” she said. “You can’t do a fair investigation if your time [is] limited.”

She also expressed concern that the inquiries might prompt some women to recant their charges, fearing they cannot be proved.