Statement of the National Network to End Domestic Violence
1. Introduction
Battered women often use welfare as a step to gain the economic stability needed to leave a violent relationship.[1] Batterers are very calculating. They often control every aspect of a woman’s life – social, emotional and financial. This financial control in particular makes it difficult for a woman to leave a violent relationship. Beyond keeping a tight grip on the family finances, batterers will frequesntly prevent women from working or getting an education.[2] If the women are already employed, their abusive partners have often used a variety of tactics to prevent them from going to work or to get them fired.[3] An employed woman is threatening to an abuser – she has a certain degree of independence and control over her own life that provides her with means and an opportunity to escape. Consequently, batterers resort to threats and harassment at work, inflicting black eyes or other physical evidence of violence to shame a woman from going to work, stealing the keys and other delaying tactics to make her late – anything to get her fired and maintain control over her life.[4]
This places battered women in a particularly unique and dangerous predicament. If they cannot get their needs met by the TANF system as it exists today, they may find themselves in a situation where their options are to return to an abusive relationship or to live on the streets with their children.[5] It is imperative that TANF is strengthened to address the barriers that keep battered women from gaining independence and self-sufficiency.
In preparing these comments, The National Network to End Domestic Violence (NNEDV) reviewed the research on the impact of welfare reform on battered women and consulted with state domestic violence coalitions and local programs. These comments will cover some of the key reforms that are needed to help battered women and their children achieve independence, stability and, most important, security. While these comments focus specifically on the impact of welfare reform on victims of domestic violence, NNEDV believes that the reduction of poverty for all families should be the focus of the TANF program. NNEDV advocates for an end to family violence in the framework of the larger struggle against violence, poverty, homelessness and other social ills in an effort to contribute the ultimate goal of a more just society.
2. Achieving Long Term Self-Sufficiency Should Be the Goal of TANF Assistance
The goal of TANF assistance should be to help people achieve self-sufficiency through employment that pays a living wage. The goal of simply moving women off welfare into jobs without giving them the skills to maintain sustainable employment will not help create long-term economic independence. To count the numbers of women who are working without assessing whether or not those jobs pay enough to support both the women and their children creates artificially high success rates.
The focus on immediate job placement subverts the original purpose of welfare reform, which was helping women to transition from welfare to work in a manner that would keep them from repeatedly returning to public assistance. It also discourages TANF workers from strategizing with women on a case-by-case basis to create individualized plans that will address their specific needs.
This individual approach is critical to battered women in particular. Although there may be some similarities among battered women, each woman’s case is unique.
[E]ach battered woman faces different risks and therefore has different needs for safety and self-sufficiency. Because each battered woman’s risks are different, determining what battered women need must be done on a case-by-case basis. There is no formula for safety or self-sufficiency. Options that may work for one woman will increase danger for another.[6]
Each woman’s situation must be assessed individually to accurately and effectively create a plan that will help her and her children move safely from assistance to independence. In order to do this, caseworkers must not have their decision making restricted by arbitrary caps. This means removing restrictions on the length of time that women can be involved in educational training as a legitimate “work activity” under TANF guidelines and eliminating the cap on the number of women whose educational training can count towards a state’s work participation rate. This also means expanding the definition of “work activity” to include full time care of a disabled child or a child under 6, vocational or educational training at any level, and participation in activities addressing domestic or sexual violence, mental health, substance abuse and / or disability.
3. States, in Consultation with State Domestic Violence Coalitions, Must Be Required to Address Domestic Violence as Part of their Implementation of TANF.
By enacting the Family Violence Option[7] (FVO), Congress recognized that the combined experience of poverty and violence raises particularly difficult issues for battered women. However, a state’s response to domestic violence needs to be broader than the range of protections offered by the FVO. The purpose of requiring states to respond to domestic violence in their administration of TANF funds is to address the root causes of poverty among battered women and provide the kinds of services that will assist battered women in removing barriers to self-sufficiency and permanently transition from public assistance to independence.
Exemptions from program requirements are a critical tool in assisting battered women, but in order to help battered women transition effectively and permanently from welfare to self-sufficiency, a more holistic approach is necessary. Other important responses include providing ongoing support services, mandatory domestic violence training for TANF workers, and resources to create and sustain an ongoing collaboration between domestic violence advocates and TANF workers. Participation in such programs should be voluntary and not used to sanction or impose burdensome requirements on a battered woman.
A. Frequent Screening for Domestic Violence
TANF caseworkers should begin screening for domestic violence at the initial intake interview and continue to do so at various points in the process. This screening should be voluntary and non-coercive. In the beginning, the caseworker is a stranger to the woman, and as such, it may take time for a woman to feel comfortable enough to disclose to a caseworker that she is being battered. That’s why it is imperative that a woman be allowed to disclose at any point in the process without fear of sanction.
In the event of a disclosure, the caseworker should follow up with immediate referrals, either to a domestic violence advocate already present in the office or to a domestic violence program that the TANF office has a relationship with. Again, services should never be imposed on a woman. No one is better qualified than the woman herself to assess the danger of her situation and choose the options that best protect her and her children.
B. Exemptions from Program Requirements
Battered women face many pressures in their attempt to extricate themselves from abusive situations. Some women will require waivers from specific program requirements while they are in the process of rebuilding their lives. The clock should stop ticking while victim’s taking time to address these barriers. It is imperative that time limits on assistance do not add extra pressure to women who are already dealing with the stress of leaving an abusive relationship and reestablishing themselves. States need the flexibility to create a range of services and responses to domestic violence. However, the state’s plan to address domestic violence must include exemptions from program requirements and time limits when domestic violence interferes with a woman’s ability to complete the required tasks.
C. Provision of Support Services
Some battered women may want to participate and can meet the requirements of the program when provided with the necessary support services. They have less of a need for waivers than for a range of support services that will facilitate compliance with program requirements. Often times the barriers that battered women face to gainful employment are not only safety concerns, but also more basic considerations such as transportation, childcare, basic job skills and referrals to domestic violence program when requested. These concerns are not exclusive to battered women; they are common to many TANF recipients. Citing a survey done in Florida, Eleanor Lyon found that ”51% of all the sampled women in Florida’s WAGES (TANF) program cited transportation as an obstacle, 44% said childcare, and 31% said lack of job skills.”[8] In addition, many battered women also encounter a crisis in the availability of affordable housing, which often has waiting lists years long. Without access to affordable housing, a battered woman finds herself left with two unbearable alternatives – returning to an abuser or enduring homelessness. Assistance in overcoming these obstacles to self-sufficiency should be offered as an integral part of a state’s plan to address domestic violence.
D. Screening Required Prior to Enforcement of Any Available Sanction
It is imperative that TANF workers not immediately enforce sanctions on battered women without assessing the individual’s situation and referring the woman for voluntary participation in counseling or support services to help her overcome the obstacles she faces in meeting program requirements. This extra step between non-compliance and sanction allows victims of domestic violence to address the challenges that may be unique to violent situations and should never be used to coerce a woman into services in order to avoid sanction. As noted in the report to the Department of Health and Humans Services about the experience of seven counties administering TANF to battered women,
[t]he programs that did best at identifying domestic violence issues were those set up to identify all major barriers to self-sufficiency – that is, those with a strong orientation to use ‘carrots’. Programs focused more on immediate employment rather than on longer-term self-sufficiency were not well set up to identify any type of barrier, and the same was true for domestic violence issues.[9]
Assessing the barriers a woman faces and offering necessary services before mechanically applying sanctions has proven to be a more effective way to facilitate the transition from welfare to work.
E. Training
To help battered women navigate the TANF system, it is imperative that both TANF workers and domestic violence advocates are trained. TANF workers need to be trained to recognize the signs of domestic violence and to understand the unique barriers that battered women face. Domestic violence advocates need to be trained in the structure of the TANF system so they can assist their clients in obtaining all of the benefits to which they are entitled.
Domestic violence is a complex phenomenon that can manifest itself in many different ways, and without a background in the issue, it can be very difficult for a TANF caseworker to properly assist a battered woman. In order to be able to help a woman create an individual plan to transition out of a violent relationship and into self-sufficiency, TANF workers need to be aware of all of the challenges that battered women face, including issues of safety, affordable housing, transportation, childcare and legal assistance. Mandatory domestic violence training for TANF caseworkers should be a fundamental component of a state’s domestic violence plan. “Training gives workers the understanding to interpret clues and indicators, to probe carefully and understand correctly. And to remain non-judgmental but supportive.”[10] If an individual’s caseworker is not sensitive to these issues, the worker may push a woman to take actions that are either unworkable or unsafe. This kind of response may make a woman feel that her only available option is to return to her abuser.
It is critical that this training be federally mandated and done consistently by experienced domestic violence advocates. The training must be scheduled with regularity to ensure that even if an agency has a high turnover rate among caseworkers, all caseworkers will undergo some form of domestic violence training in their orientation process. This training should be conducted by and in coordination with a local organization whose primary purpose is to provide services to victims of domestic violence or a state domestic violence coalition who will train caseworkers in the empowerment model of working with victims of domestic violence. Finally, resources should be allocated to pay for training provided by domestic violence advocates whose time and resources are already stretched thin.
The TANF system itself is also complicated and difficult to navigate for those not well versed in its intricacies. Domestic violence advocates are not usually trained in the details of what assistance is available to women, making it difficult to know what aid is available to a particular client under TANF. Considering the complex web of rules and exemptions governing what assistance is available to battered women – everything from what aid is available to undocumented immigrants to what options battered women have to stop the clock under the Family Violence Option or similar state legislation – navigating the system can be very difficult. Grants should be made available to states to conduct voluntary training for domestic violence advocates so that advocates will be better equipped to help their client access services and meet program requirements. Also, training between the two agencies can also increase contact and communication between the two agencies. This interaction can ease what in the past has been characterized as a difficult relationship between domestic violence programs and TANF agencies.[11]
4. Confidentiality and Autonomy
The cornerstone of state plans for assisting battered women in the TANF system must include strong protections for the woman’s confidentiality and autonomy. Whether a disclosure is made to a caseworker, a child support advocate, or a domestic violence advocate, the information that a battered woman discloses must be held in the strictest confidence. This is a critical component in working with battered women. No information should be shared with other workers or agencies unless consent is obtained from the woman herself.
There are very good reasons for privileging the information disclosed by a woman facing a domestic violence situation and giving her control over the amount of information she wants generally known by the agency. Such protection of confidentiality need not compromise the ability of either the on-site advocate or any TANF caseworker to develop an appropriate self-sufficiency plan. However, the lines of communications and privacy need to be drawn clearly and carefully, understood by all, supported the administration, and communicated directly to staff.”[12]
If this policy is not strictly enforced, it will deter women from divulging abusive situations. Without this information, managing a battered woman’s case will be exceedingly difficult. In addition, the fear in some states that child protective services will find out about the abuse will also keep some women from coming forward.[13] If women are not certain that the information they share with their caseworker will be held in the strictest confidence, not only will they be reluctant to come forward, they may elect to stay in the abusive relationship just to ensure that they keep custody of their children.[14]
In addition, victims of domestic violence who come forward and disclose the abuse to their case workers should not be forced into services or into dealing with the criminal justice system in order to get the assistance is that is due to them under TANF. Battered women often know more about the intimate details of their own situations than any caseworker could independently assess.
A battered woman will face one set of batterer-generated risks if she stays in the relationship and a different set if she leaves. Leaving a relationship does not guarantee the reduction or elimination of violence, threats or other risks. For some battered women, leaving may create new risks or increase existing ones. Battered women continually analyze the risks they face.[15]
These women know whether or not going to the police would help or hurt their situation, what services they need, and whether it is prudent to seek child support. For example, there are many reasons that a protective order may not increase the safety and security of battered women and their children.
Some of the reasons a protective order may not work are: the batterer will not obey court order; the batterer will increase his violence when he is “served”” with the order; the protection order may not include protection of the children; the batterer will lose his job as a result of the order and this will reduce the likelihood of child support; she will lose her job if she misses work because she must go to court to get an order; the protection order will “kick him out” of the home and she can’t afford the rent on her own; or the batterer will find the woman in hiding because the legal process for obtaining an order may give him information about where she is and the opportunity to have contact with her in court.[16]
All of the factors that figure into a TANF case where domestic violence is present calls for an independent assessment of how program requirements may affect the safety of that particular woman. Caseworkers should not be allowed to force a woman into support groups or other services in order to access TANF funds.
5. Marriage Promotion
Any efforts to promote marriage should recognize the direct and imminent danger that women and children face when living in a violent home. There are many reasons why a woman may not be able to leave an abusive home. The answers warre complicated and varied, with economic dependence being a significant cause. The danger inherent in marriage promotion activities is that women may feel additional shame and stigma if they attempt to flee a violent home and end an abusive marriage. They also may become even more economically dependent on the perpetrator if the TANF system provides more resources to women who stay married to the father of their children. Women should not have to stay in an abusive home in order to receive a larger TANF check. Nor should the stigma of divorce become so great that a battered woman chooses to remain in a dangerous situation to avoid the societal stigma and shame of a failed marriage. These are the real, unintended consequences of a policy that emphasizes marriage at the expense of safety.
Additionally, programs that promote marriage may take a naïve approach to the causes and impact of domestic violence. Programs that promote couples counseling, parenting education, or other basic services may not have the expertise to deal with the complicated nature of battering. Batterer intervention must be long term and focused on changing the belief system that the batterer holds about his right to use violence to control his wife and children. Traditional psychotherapy, conflict resolution and anger management have not proved to be efficacious in addressing abusive behavior. It is critical that marriage promotion programs not utilize such techniques in its bid to build healthy families. Such activities are dangerous for victims and their children and should not be promoted as solutions for battering. Instead, resources should be directed towards programs that address both victim safety and offender accountability and have the expertise to deal with the potential lethality of domestic violence situations.
6. Conclusion
When provided with the necessary training and support, battered women can successfully make the transition from public assistance to total independence. However, this journey must be aided by individualized planning and protected by strict confidentiality. The system must be designed to address the root causes of the woman’s poverty and respond to her individual needs, always keeping safety at the forefront. Implementing the strategies outlined in these comments will allow battered women to leave abusive relationships and establish independent, violence free lives for themselves and their children.
[1] Eleanor Lyon, “Poverty, Welfare and Battered Women: What does the research tell us?” 1, MINCAVA 1998. “In nearly all of the studies which have addressed the issue, well over half of the women receiving AFDC reported that they had experienced physical abuse … by an intimate male partner at some point during their adult lives…When women were asked about more recent violence from their male partners, the rate remained high – from 19.5% to 32%.”
[2] “39.7% of the currently abused women … reported that their partner tries to prevent them from obtaining education and training.” Id. at 4.
[3] Eleanor Lyon, “Welfare, Poverty and Abused Women: New Research and its Implications,” National Resource Center on Domestic Violence October 2000 at “46% of the women in the program reported their partners were jealous about the possibility of their meeting someone new at work, 21% were threatened or harassed while they were at work, and 32% were told that they would never be able to succeed at work or school.”
[4] “ This study of women who experienced current or past abuse found that 43.2% reported that they don’t feel safe from their abusive partner at work, 29.8% reported they have been fired or lost a job because of domestic violence, and 34.7% said their education and training efforts have been hampered by abuse. More specifically, 84.5% said their abusive partner had kept them from sleeping, 58.7% said his threats had made them afraid to go to work or school. 47.1% said he refused to provide promised child care at the last minute, 41.5% said he had called them repeatedly at work, 34% had been refused promised transportation at the last minute, and 33.9% had been beaten so badly they could not work.” Id. at 4
[5] “A 1990 Ford foundation study found that 50% of homeless women and children were fleeing abusive homes.” Joan Zorza, “Woman Battering: A Major Cause of Homelessness,” Clearinghouse Review, vol.25, no. 4 (1991).
[6] Jill Davies, “Building Opportunities for Battered Women’s Safety and Self-Sufficiency,” at 5, Violence Against Women Online Resources, MINCAVA 1998.
[7] 42 U.S.C. §602(a)(7).
[8] “Welfare, Poverty and Abused Women,” at 6.
[9] Martha R. Burt, Janine M. Zweig and Kathryn Schlichter, “Strategies for Addressing the Needs of Domestic Violence Victims Within the TANF Program: The Experience of Seven Counties,” Chapter 8 at 5, Urban Institute report to Department of Health and Human Services, June 30, 2000.
[10] Burt, Chapter 8 at 3.
[11] “Cross-training and developing mutual understandings of each agency’s mission, constraints, and resources have also been important in assuring that clients get the services and supports they need. Often this has meant overcoming histories of non-communication or, worse, distrust and suspicion.” Burt, Chapter 8 at 5.
[12] Burt, Chapter 8 at 12.
[13] “Women are afraid that their children will be taken away from them. Some women have had their children taken away from them due to endangerment. Batterers use this as a way to threaten women.” Id Chapter 2 at 10.
[14] “DCF has taken an aggressive stance on children residing in homes with domestic violence. Children are now removed with little investigations from homes in which domestic violence occurs. Women who lose their children are being forced to address the domestic violence issue before they are allowed custody of their children. Although this policy is not directly related to the activities of the One Stop Career Centers, it may effect women’s willingness to disclose domestic violence as a barrier to work.” Burt. Chapter 5 at 8.
[15] Davies at 3.
[16] Davies at 12.