[Senate Hearing 113-846]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 113-846
ACCESSING SUPPORT: HOW THE
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT
SERVES HAWAII MILITARY FAMILIES
EXPERIENCING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED THIRTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
OCTOBER 16, 2014
__________
HONOLULU, HAWAII
__________
Serial No. J-113-74
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
21-222 PDF WASHINGTON : 2017
________________________________________________________________________________________
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office,
http://bookstore.gpo.gov. For more information, contact the GPO Customer Contact Center,
U.S. Government Publishing Office. Phone 202-512-1800, or 866-512-1800 (toll-free).
E-mail, [email protected].
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
PATRICK J. LEAHY, Vermont, Chairman
DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California CHUCK GRASSLEY, Iowa, Ranking
CHUCK SCHUMER, New York Member
DICK DURBIN, Illinois ORRIN G. HATCH, Utah
SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island JEFF SESSIONS, Alabama
AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
AL FRANKEN, Minnesota JOHN CORNYN, Texas
CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware MICHAEL S. LEE, Utah
RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut TED CRUZ, Texas
MAZIE HIRONO, Hawaii JEFF FLAKE, Arizona
Kristine Lucius, Chief Counsel and Staff Director
Kolan Davis, Republican Chief Counsel and Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
OCTOBER 16, 2014, 10:02 A.M.
STATEMENT OF COMMITTEE MEMBER
Page
Hirono, Hon. Mazie, a U.S. Senator from the State of Hawaii...... 1
STATEMENTS OF CONGRESSIONAL MEMBERS
Hanabusa, Hon. Colleen, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Hawaii................................................ 4
Schatz, Hon. Brian, a U.S. Senator from the State of Hawaii...... 3
WITNESSES
Witness List..................................................... 33
Arincorayan, Colonel Derrick, Deputy Director, Department of
Behavioral Health, Schofield Barracks Health Clinic, United
States Army Hawaii, Schofield Barracks, Hawaii,
prepared joint statement..................................... 34
Kreidman, Nanci, Chief Executive Officer, Domestic Violence
Action Center, Honolulu, Hawaii................................ 20
prepared statement........................................... 110
Lopes, Marci, Executive Director, Hawaii State Coalition Against
Domestic Violence, Honolulu, Hawaii............................ 21
prepared statement........................................... 112
Louie, Hon. David, Attorney General, State of Hawaii, Honolulu,
Hawaii......................................................... 9
prepared statement........................................... 47
attachment I to prepared statement........................... 50
attachment II to prepared statement.......................... 107
Morita, Cindy, Family Advocacy Program Manager, United States
Army Hawaii, Schofield Barracks, Hawaii........................ 7
prepared joint statement..................................... 34
Ogden, Dawn, Counseling and Advocacy Program Supervisor, Joint
Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, Pearl Harbor, Hawaii................. 8
prepared statement........................................... 42
SUBMISSION FOR THE RECORD
Baker, Hon. Rosalyn H., Senator, Hawaii State Senate, statement.. 116
ACCESSING SUPPORT: HOW THE
VIOLENCE AGAINST WOMEN ACT
SERVES HAWAII MILITARY FAMILIES
EXPERIENCING DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
----------
THURSDAY, OCTOBER 16, 2014
United States Senate,
Committee on the Judiciary,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:02 a.m. in
Room 325, at the Hawaii State Capitol, 415 South Beretania
Street, Honolulu, Hawaii, Hon. Mazie Hirono, presiding.
Present: Senator Hirono.
Also Present: Senator Schatz and Representative Colleen
Hanabusa.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. MAZIE HIRONO,
A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF HAWAII
Senator Hirono. Good morning. This hearing of the Senate
Judiciary Committee will come to order. Before we begin, I
would like to go over the Committee's rules regarding our
hearings. Today's hearing deals with a serious issue. And I
know that members of the public will act accordingly.
And I want to note at the outset that the rules of the
Senate prohibit outbursts, clapping, or demonstrations of any
kind. This includes blocking the view of people around you. So,
please be mindful of these rules. And I know this is not going
to be necessary, but if such events occur, then the person will
be asked to leave.
I am glad to be joined by my colleagues, Senator Brian
Schatz and Congresswoman Colleen Hanabusa, at this hearing.
I would like to start with an opening statement. And I will
ask my colleagues if they would also like to present opening
statements before we take our first panel. Thank you.
Twenty years ago on September 13, 1994, a Violence Against
Women Act, better known as VAWA, was signed into law. And VAWA
represented a major shift in the way Congress approached the
issue of domestic violence. With this enactment, Congress
acknowledged a Federal rule in recognizing that domestic
violence is not a private matter to be kept among family and
suffered in silence. It is a crime and should be treated as
such.
VAWA recognized that domestic violence is a complicated,
multi-faceted crime that defies easy solutions. The root causes
of domestic violence are varied. It could include a stressor
such as age, a history of family violence, and a large number
of social economic factors. To address this fact, VAWA looked
to prevent domestic violence and related crimes by encouraging
collaboration among law enforcement, the judiciary, and both
public and private sector service providers. As part of our
ongoing commitment to ending domestic violence, Congress has
reauthorized VAWA three times since 1994.
I have supported domestic violence legislation since first
taking elected office more than 30 years ago and am proud that
one of the first major bills that I co-sponsored and worked on
as a Senator was the 2013 VAWA reauthorization. I co-sponsored
that bill which focused on expanding VAWA protection and
services to better serve Indian country, the LGB community, and
protecting women regardless of immigration status.
After 20 years, therefore, more people are able to seek
VAWA protection and more services are available to meet the
needs of distinct community and populations than when first
enacted. But, work remains. Every year on the anniversary of
VAWA's passage, the national network to end domestic violence
conducts account of adults and children served by domestic
service providers all across the country.
As a snapshot, on September 17, 2013, nearly 70,000 people,
including 575 from Hawaii, sought such services. Still, while
service providers helped nearly 70,000 people that day, there
were still nearly 10,000 men and women who sought services
whose needs were not met. There are also populations that VAWA
does not cover.
One community that has been largely removed from the VAWA
conversation is the military, our active duty personnel and
their families. That does not mean the military men and women
go unserved. In fact, for many years, the Department of
Defense's Family Advocacy Program or FAP and other support
services have provided military victims with assistance. These
programs work with perpetrators and their military command to
prevent domestic violence and enforce appropriate consequences.
We know that the military population faces different
challenges than the population at large. Females who are
between 20 and 24 years of age are at the greatest risk of non-
fatal, intimate partner violence.
In 2012, nearly one-half of active duty personnel, military
personnel, were under the age of 25. And while this should not
be taken to indicate higher instances of domestic violence in
the military, the age factor is worth noting.
There are also emotional and psychological stressors that
military and their families experience that are not shared by
the rest of us. Deployments, for example, present a specific
type of long-term absence from home.
The transition back to civilian life after deployment is
also challenging, particularly for those who have been in
combat. These are just two possibilities--two possible
contributing factors to potential domestic violence in the
military. And what we do know is that military-connected men
and women do seek non-military provider services.
During a two-week period in September of 2014, the Domestic
Violence Action Center, DVAC, worked with 40 active duty
personnel or intimate partners of active duty personnel who
sought help. That is four people a day over a 10-day period.
Active duty military and their families are a part of our
community and they should be able to seek services when and
where they feel most comfortable.
Attorney General Louie has noted in his written testimony
that VAWA's stakeholders have identified three priority areas
for collaboration of services. The first two appropriately are
providing enhanced training for first responders and improving
outreach to underserved populations. The third issue identified
is addressing the need for services sought by military-
connected men and women.
To this end, I anticipate expanding upon the Attorney
General's VAWA military working group efforts. The main
question we want to answer today is not why military men and
women are seeking services off base; rather, we are focusing on
how best to address the needs of these men and women.
Given the current Federal budget constraint, we must
examine how our existing Department of Defense and VAWA
resources can be used to ensure quality services for our
servicemembers and their families, and how can we assure that
there is a continuum of care, a safety net for men and women
involved in abusive relationships, regardless of where abusive
incident occurs, when it happens, or who employs those
affected; as we gain a better understanding of the unique
stressors that impact military personnel, how can we fit their
specific needs into the program directive of VAWA.
I believe the answer is through collaboration, which VAWA
envisioned since it was first enacted, collaboration among
State and local governments, service providers, and the
Department of Defense. It will take a community-wide effort for
us to eliminate this community-wide problem.
Today's hearing is an opportunity to hear from the very
stakeholders and strengthening the collaboration between
civilian and military service providers to see where there is
overlap and learn where collaboration can be fostered and
improved upon.
As a Member of both the Senate Armed Services and Judiciary
Committees, I look forward to working with appropriate
stakeholders to ensure that we do the best we can in both the
military and civilian sectors to meet the needs, particularly
today, of military-connected victims of domestic violence. We
have two panels this morning, and I look forward to hearing
from you.
Now, Senator Schatz and Congresswoman Hanabusa, if you
would like to provide opening statements, you may do so.
STATEMENT OF HON. BRIAN SCHATZ,
A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF HAWAII
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Senator Hirono. And I want to
thank you for organizing a field hearing on such an important
issue. Domestic violence is tragic and the damage it causes
does not end with the victim. Violence hurts our families, our
children, and communities.
We have made progress in preventing domestic violence and
supporting victims. Since the passage of VAWA in 1994, there
has been a drop in domestic violence incidents by over 50
percent. Last year, President Obama made history when he signed
into law a stronger VAWA bill. And I am proud to say that all
Members of Hawaii's Congressional delegation were co-sponsors
of this legislation.
The new law will help bring survivors of domestic violence
out of the shadows to receive life-saving services. But, there
is more to do. The national network to end domestic violence
puts out an annual snapshot of how many victims are seeking
help in each State in a 24-hour period.
Hawaii's most recent snapshot was sobering. In one day,
over 500 domestic violence victims were served in Hawaii. And
domestic violence hotlines received over 100 calls from
victims. That is more than five calls an hour. The focus of
this hearing is on the support available to military-connected
families that experience domestic violence.
Domestic violence in military families is such a critical
issue because it is a problem that seems to be getting worse.
Even as incidents of domestic violence are going down across
the country, domestic violence in military and veteran
communities appears to be going up.
The military provides many resources for victims of
domestic violence, but there are challenges to addressing
domestic violence in military families. Military families often
live far from their friends and families, which makes them
particularly socially isolated. They live with enormous stress
from deployment, both while the servicemember is away and when
they return.
Victims also face a terrible choice in reporting domestic
violence to the military. A report could mean risking the
servicemember's career and the whole family's financial
stability. For this reason, many victims feel more comfortable
seeking support from community-based organizations.
There is clearly a role for both military support services
and community-based support. But, we need to ask whether
military support services are adequately addressing the needs
of victims. And we also need to look at whether VAWA's funding
takes into account the reality that community-based
organizations are part of the front line for military families
experiencing domestic violence.
I hope that this is the beginning of a dialogue between the
Department of Defense and community-based domestic violence
organizations about creating a collaborative and coordinated
approach to preventing domestic violence in military families
and supporting victims. Thank you.
Senator Hirono. Thank you.
Congresswoman Hanabusa.
STATEMENT OF HON. COLLEEN HANABUSA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF HAWAII
Representative Hanabusa. Good morning. I want to begin
first by thanking Senator Hirono for convening this field
hearing and also to Senator Schatz and all the panelists,
distinguished guests, and everyone who made time to join us
today.
Domestic violence touches every corner of our community. It
does not depend on race or income. It affects men, women, gay,
straight. And while it has recently been the subject of talk
about sports figures and police officers, we cannot let that
distract us from the fact that it reaches across the spectrum
of social and professional relations.
We are here today to address how VAWA serves Hawaii's
military families and basically how we are going to address the
domestic violence. Now, before we begin that, we do have to
kind of understand how VAWA came about. And Senator Hirono gave
us the rundown, which is that it was in 1994. Actually, Vice
President Biden is the one credited for the passage of the
original VAWA. And it expired in the year 2011. It did not get
reauthorized until just recently in 2013.
It was a very interesting vote. Though Senator Hirono left
us in the House and went to the Senate, she clearly understands
the difficulty of a piece of legislation like this getting
through the House of Representatives. It passed the Senate, 78
to 22, and it passed the House, 286 to 136.
Now, what you need--138. What you need to understand is of
that, 87 Republicans joined the solid Democrats in passing VAWA
in the House. What it meant was the importance of that issue.
Because 87 Republicans in the House, for that to come to the
floor, violated what they call their Hastert Rule, which meant
the majority of the majority have to be in favor of a piece of
legislation before it could be actually voted on. But, the
concept and those issues that were contained in VAWA mobilized
a portion of the Republican coalition that said this was too
important, we have to do it. And that is how VAWA became law.
And it did have major components. And one that helped build
those coalitions, for example, the tribal aspects of it, gay
and lesbian and immigration, all as mentioned by Senator
Hirono. But, what it did was it managed to force the building
of that coalition. And that is how we have VAWA today.
We also must understand what it means in terms of what the
purpose of it is. It is legal assistance, transitional housing,
counseling support, advocacy. And what it is credited with with
some statistics that have been used is that since its inception
and about 15 years later, it reduced violence about 58 percent
in 15 years. And I think they were measuring it primarily by
weight, but there was some transition that was done in that.
But, sadly, domestic violence affects your military
families, which is the subject of today's hearing. And whether
the victim of abuse is a member of the Armed Services or a
family member, we owe it to her or him--and let there be no
question that VAWA applies to both men and women, though we do
call it Violence Against Women Act--because domestic violence
knows no boundaries applied. And we need to help to provide a
safe home. And we owe it to the abuser to also discover how do
we break this cycle of violence.
The most important first step is for us to bring the
question out of the shadows by signing--by shining the light on
the problem and acknowledging that it affects Hawaii's military
families. And we need to speak open and have productive
discussion about what we can do and must do.
And that is why, as I look across from me and I see Nanci
Kreidman, I know of no one who probably knows this issue as
well as she does as to the Hawaii community. And she can
probably give us what I consider to be the hidden facts about
Hawaii's military, because Hawaii's military has always
represented a special culture of their own. And I think that is
probably been the reason why we have had such a difficulty in
understanding, getting our hands on this particular issue.
We are hoping that what these hearings will do is to bring
this matter out and make it so that people can seek the help
and the assistance that we need. So, we must make it a
priority, with the health and safety of Hawaii's military's
families as paramount. And I do look forward to participating
in this conversation. Again, I thank you, Senator Hirono.
Senator Hirono. Thank you very much, Senator Schatz and
Congresswoman Hanabusa. I would like to now ask our first panel
of witnesses to step forward and be seated.
I would like to briefly introduce our first panel of
witnesses. Colonel Derrick Arincorayan--did I pronounce that
correctly?
Colonel Arincorayan. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Hirono [continuing]. And Miss Cindy Morita are here
on behalf of U.S. Army Hawaii to share with us information
about the services available to men and women connected with
the military who are experiencing domestic violence.
Colonel Arincorayan is a published researcher who serves as
a Deputy Director of the Army's Behavioral Health unit in
Hawaii. He has served with the Army for 28 years. He has a
doctorate in clinical social work.
His colleague Miss Morita serves as U.S. Army Hawaii's
Family Advocacy program manager. She has a master's degree in
social work and has worked on domestic violence issues in
various States for a number of years. I look forward to hearing
from both of you.
Miss Dawn Ogden, the Counseling And Advocacy Program
Supervisor at joint base Pearl Harbor-Hickam, which provides
services for Navy and Air Force personnel and their families,
has a master's degree in social work and has worked to provide
clinical services in both the civilian and military sectors for
a number of years. Miss Ogden has been with Joint Base Pearl
Harbor-Hickam programs since 2001, and has been a supervisor
since 2010.
And I would like to take this time to acknowledge our
military partners in the audience today, including CAPT.
Neferet. Raise your--there you are. Thank you so much for
joining us, representing Pacific Fleet. Theresa Phillips, who
is representing Navy Region Hawaii, and the staff representing
Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam. There are a number of staff
people here. Thank you.
Additionally, the Commander of the Schofield Health Clinic,
Colonel Everhart, is here and staff representing Army Garrison
Hawaii. Thank you all for being here.
The Honorable David Louie has served as Hawaii's Attorney
General since 2011. In that capacity, he oversees 175 deputy
attorneys--I used to be one myself way back when--and provides
legal counsel for the governor, legislature, and various State
agencies.
Among other things, the Attorney General's office receives
the vast majority of Federal funding through the VAWA act and
will share with us how VAWA funds have been allocated. And
before we hear from this panel, though, I do need to swear you
in. So, please rise and raise your hands.
Do you affirm that the testimony you are about to give
before the committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth so help you God?
Colonel Arincorayan. I do.
Ms. Morita. I do.
Ms. Ogden. I do.
Attorney General Louie. I do.
Senator Hirono. Please be seated. So, we are going to start
with Colonel Arincorayan.
Colonel Arincorayan. I will----
Senator Hirono. Go ahead, Miss Morita.
STATEMENT OF CINDY MORITA, FAMILY ADVOCACY PROGRAM MANAGER,
UNITED STATES ARMY HAWAII, SCHOFIELD
BARRACKS, HAWAII
Ms. Morita. I would like to start off by giving a warm
Aloha and thank you to Senator Hirono, Senator Schatz, and
Congresswoman Hanabusa for this opportunity to speak at the
Senate Judiciary hearing regarding Army Family Advocacy
Program, which I will refer to as FAP.
FAP is the Department of Defense social service program
whose mission is to help address child abuse, child neglect,
and domestic abuse affecting our military families. We provide
primary, secondary, and tertiary provision services and
clinical intervention.
The Army's Hawaii footprint consists of approximately
15,000 married active duty soldiers, with an average of 46
percent living on post and 54 percent living off post.
The United States Army FAP here in Hawaii is comprised of
the following programs. FAP behavioral health provides
assessment, treatment, clinical interventions at Tripler Army
Medical Center and the Schofield Barracks health clinic. And
Army community service FAP prevention provides education,
support services, including parent support program and victim
advocacy program.
One of our goals is to ensure for every incident of
domestic violence and child abuse, the families receive timely
and appropriate care. Army Hawaii FAP has a surveillance
initiative for families reporting verbal disputes to the
military police. This initiative allows victim advocates and
social workers to reach out early to potential victims of
domestic violence.
The reporting process also involves multiple processes
which are triggered after a domestic violence incident is
reported. FAP, child welfare service, law enforcement, and
commanders may all be engaged and provide coordinated services.
Commanders are mandated to report all child abuse and domestic
abuse to the military police, who are then required to notify
FAP for coordination and case management.
FAP ensures victims have access to military and civilian
resources that provide support and safety. Throughout the
process, a victim advocate is available to assist victims with
making a report, crucial safety planning, providing information
on legal rights, and reporting options, and leading victim
support groups. VA can also attend court hearings and law
enforcement interviews. Our dedicated victim advocates provide
24 hours, seven days a week responses and safety planning
services.
FAP Behavioral Health provides individuals counseling,
couples and family counseling, domestic violence intervention,
parent support, and healthy relationship groups. FAP also
offers ongoing mandatory critical training for commanders,
troops, professional and community members that addresses
safety, education, spouse and intimate partner abuse,
prevention, and family life education. We also offer numerous
prevention activities and support, including new parent support
program, home visits, and classes. We maintain relationships
with external communities to help coordinate reporting and
synchronized efforts.
The United States Army Hawaii FAP also, along with our
sister service leadership, has prioritized collaboration with
each other and with our civilian partners through the military
Family Advocacy Coordinating Council, comprised of military and
civilian agencies, designed to facilitate the opportunity to
network and create communications, share processes, identify
challenges, and provide information and updates.
One of the successful outcomes through this partnership
included an agreement to provide notification between family
courts and military services. The notification agreement
increased our visibility on restraining orders and allowed us
to reach out to victims in a timely manner. We know the sooner
we can intervene, the better we can provide safety options for
victims of domestic violence.
We hope we were able to provide you an overview of the
United States Army Hawaii FAP program. We would like to again
thank you for the opportunity to share with you our process and
also to extend our appreciation to Congress for its continued
support of the family advocacy program that allows us to work
with our military families and meet their needs. Thank you.
[The prepared joint statement of Colonel Derrick
Arincorayan and Cindy Morita appears as a submission for the
record.]
Senator Hirono. I apologize for my coughing, but I have a
cold. I do not think I am giving anybody my germs for now. I
think I am not contagious at the moment.
Please go ahead, Miss Ogden. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF DAWN OGDEN, COUNSELING AND ADVOCACY PROGRAM
SUPERVISOR, JOINT BASE PEARL HARBOR-HICKAM, PEARL HARBOR,
HAWAII
Ms. Ogden. Good morning, Senator Hirono, Senator Schatz,
and Congresswoman Hanabusa. Thank you for the opportunity to
address you today.
My name is Dawn Ogden. I have been a clinical social worker
with the Department of Navy for almost 18 years. I am honored
to share information about the domestic violence services and
programs provided at Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam.
I have worked with the Family Advocacy Program since
starting with the Navy in government service in 1996. I have
seen the commitment the Navy has to ending domestic violence as
a clinician working directly with victims, offenders, and their
children for my first 14 years, and now as a supervisor for 22
staff members employed by Joint Base Pearl Harbor-Hickam as
part of their family violence prevention and intervention
programs, the services we provide to active duty Navy and Air
Force members and their families. In addition, we serve
commands, first responders such as military medical and law
enforcement, and other military partners like child and youth
programs, and military mental health.
We also collaborate and coordinate services with community
organizations and institutions such as Child Welfare Services,
Domestic Violence Action Center, Honolulu Police Department,
Women, Infant, Children, and many of our local schools, with a
high number of the military dependents, to name just a few.
We believe a coordinated community response is vital to
effectively responding to domestic violence, and we are
committed to enhancing opportunities for collaboration and
building relationships. Again, thank you for this opportunity,
and I look forward to being of service in today's hearing.
[The prepared statement of Dawn Ogden appears as a
submission for the record.]
Senator Hirono. Thank you.
Attorney General.
STATEMENT OF HON. DAVID LOUIE, ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF
HAWAII, HONOLULU, HAWAII
Attorney General Louie. Thank you, Senator Hirono. And let
me thank the Committee for convening this hearing. My thanks to
you personally, Senator Hirono, and also to Senator Schatz and
also to Congresswoman Hanabusa for your leadership on this
issue. It is of vital importance to both our State and our
community here, as well as to the Nation.
I have submitted written testimony. And I am not going to
read it all to you. I know you are pleased at that. Let me just
hit a couple of the highlights that I would like to note for
this hearing.
First off, I mean obviously, there is a domestic violence
issue and problem here in Hawaii. My office tracks statistics
on these matters through our Hawaii Criminal Justice Division.
In 2013, there were 4,959 domestic violence-related
arrests. Those are just arrests. This is a 13 percent increase
over the last five years. In 2013, there were 8,750 victims
that received assistance. This was a 16 percent decrease, which
I think, you know, you never really know, but I think it
reflects decreases in funding. It may reflect decreases in
reporting and just changes in the way things happen.
It is a problem. We all know it is a problem. And I am very
pleased that you are spotlighting and convening this so that we
can address the problem that the military shares with our
community. This is not a military problem, it is not a Hawaii
problem. It is a problem for all of us, and it crosses all
lines, as Congresswoman Hanabusa noted.
We have been so very fortunate. And I think I thank you
folks for your roles in getting VAWA passed again. And I thank
you so much. We have been in the forefront, helping to
administer those grants here in Hawaii by a million dollars a
year. And so every year, we have convened a group of 14
representatives, including law enforcement, domestic violence,
sexual assault, community providers, prosecuting attorney,
police chiefs, Family Court judges, et cetera, to come together
and figure out how are we going to distribute this money in the
best way possible, given it is limited funds. And so we do that
every year.
And in general, we give 5 percent to the judiciary, 25
percent to the police, 25 percent to prosecutor, and 30 percent
to victims' services. There is also a 15 percent discretionary
amount that we have always allocated that to victim services.
So, we give 45 percent of the grant to victim services,
believing that that is a very important area to go through.
Now, what does my office do in this area? Obviously, I am
the chief law enforcement officer of the State of Hawaii, but
primarily, criminal matters and matters of domestic violence,
sexual assault, things like that, we rely upon the Honolulu
prosecutor and the prosecutors of all the counties, because
basically all of that authority to prosecute those matters is
delegated out to the various counties.
But, in addition to helping to distribute the VAWA grants,
about two years ago, Senator Schatz called me into his office
and we had a meeting with I think Nanci Kreidman and others.
There were other community providers. And what was raised was
the lack, essentially, of a coordinated community response that
there was not always good communication between the first
responders, who many times would roll over. As they got
promoted--you would help to train them, but as they got
promoted, then there was not also the training for the next
person coming into the position. People change positions, so
relationships did not always get built.
And so we looked at that and we thought, well, let us
convene a group, since we already have the VAWA State planning
committee. I put it to the planning committee, since we were
already addressing our domestic violence issues, would they
like to participate in a working group to address this
coordinated community response, and the central question, which
was posed by both Abraham Lincoln and Bill Bradley in his most
recent book, how can we all do better. Okay.
And so I was very pleased that the response was
overwhelmingly positive by this group. We got together. It has
been my great privilege and pleasure to serve in a capacity as
convening this group. Over the last year, we have met six
times. Law enforcement has come, the judiciary has come. There
have been service providers that come, prosecutors, police, and
it has really been a great conversation.
Because one of the things is that by getting together and
talking about these things and trying to identify issues and
where do we have opportunities to collaborate, communicate, and
cooperate, we were able to form relationships. And people were
able to pick up the phone and talk to their counterparts. And
that is such a huge thing, that I look forward to you folks and
to our community and to the military to try and work in a
collaborative fashion. Just the mere fact of getting together
in this room alone and in meetings that we had, really helped
to focus what people's--not only their issues but their
challenges. Because it is one thing for, you know, someone to
say, oh, you are not doing your job or you need to do a better
job, but when you appreciate the fact that everybody is working
under limited resources and that everybody wants to do a better
job, you can figure out how to collaborate and not duplicate
services.
I really appreciate the opportunity to work with all of the
people on our planning group. We focused, as you mentioned in
your opening remarks, Senator, that we picked three areas. And
the first one was a training for first responders, outreach to
underserved community, and then addressing the growing need for
services for the military.
And I--that last piece is one that we have just started to
promote and to work on. We have convened a subgroup to address
that. And we were in the process of starting to figure out how
we were going to reach out to the military. So, this is very
convenient for us that you can foster----
Senator Hirono. Great minds think alike.
Attorney General Louie. There we go. I look forward to that
conversation. And I think it is very important to have that
conversation at multiple levels. That is, if only the staff are
talking and only the line workers are talking, it is not
enough. If only the top leaders are talking, that is not
enough. We have to have engagement and discussion and continued
discussion at all levels so that we can have this coordinated
response and move forward together. I look forward to working
with you folks on this, and thank you for the opportunity.
[The prepared statement of Hon. David Louie appears as a
submission for the record.]
Senator Hirono. Thank you very much, Attorney General. And
before we proceed to probably five-minute rounds of questions
so that we will be able to possibly have multiple opportunities
to ask questions, I would like to acknowledge the presence of
Flo Nakakuni, our U.S. Attorney. Thank you so much for being
here. Okay, I will start the first round of questions.
Attorney General, you mentioned that in the three areas
that you identified as need areas on this issue, that the one
that we are focusing on today, of course, is collaborating with
the military. And by the way, the password, the byword, really
is coordinated community response. I think you will hear that a
lot. That was, I believe, in the first VAWA, and it is all
about bringing the stakeholders together.
So, in your efforts, though, you said that you would like
to have outreach to the military, so that means that you do not
have a military representative or representatives on your
working group at present?
Attorney General Louie. That is correct.
Senator Hirono. Now, Miss Morita, I think it would be very
helpful for us to really understand the context in which
domestic violence occurs. And so you have got experience in,
quote, the private sector and the military side, working with
these families, and can you share with us some of the common
factors surrounding domestic violence.
Ms. Morita. For civilian or military?
Senator Hirono. Well, for both, because there are the
common factors that overlay, and then we will get to some of
the stressors--particular stressors that military families
face.
Ms. Morita. For specifically military?
Senator Hirono. Well, for both, because of the common
factors that overlay, and then we will get to some of the
stressors, particular stressors that military families face.
Ms. Morita. When you think about domestic violence, as the
opening statement indicated, there are lots of different issues
that impact military and civilian domestic violence victims.
Senator Hirono. Miss Morita, could you speak into the
microphone.
Ms. Morita. As the opening statements indicated, we talked
about how domestic violence crosses all barriers. And so when
we look at domestic violence, some of the issues that we see
are around finances, complex issues on mental health, all sorts
of different issues. What we do see in the military is that our
clients look very similar to domestic violence in all
situations.
Senator Hirono. Are there not some very specific stressors
that military personnel face that may--that would not be faced
by the civilian population?
Ms. Morita. Absolutely.
Senator Hirono. Which could inform how we provide services
to them, especially as they seek services outside of the
military context.
Ms. Morita. Absolutely.
Senator Hirono. Would you like to respond, Colonel?
Colonel Arincorayan. Yes, ma'am. So----
Senator Hirono. This is being recorded, by the way. Olelo
is here, so we appreciate you speaking into the mic.
Colonel Arincorayan. Yes, ma'am. I would like--in addition
to what Miss Morita was stating is that, you know, we are
unique in that, as you mentioned that in the opening statement,
in terms of deployment, our operational tempo is high. As we
move out of the deployment cycle into the training cycle, I
still think it remains the same. The stressors are there, long
hours, isolation, and lack of support, much like what you had
mentioned early on. So, I think those are the key differences
between the civilian and the military population.
Senator Hirono. As long as you are responding, Colonel, the
Army's testimony indicated various kinds of collaboration and
MOUs. And my understanding is that these are with State
agencies that you have these collaborative models, and MOUs.
Ms. Morita. That is correct. We have two formal MOUs, one
with the Child Welfare Service, as well as the Children's
Justice Center.
Senator Hirono. Are those State agencies?
Ms. Morita. Yes.
Senator Hirono. Since we have non-profit providers here, do
you have any kind of collaboration with them?
Ms. Morita. We do not have formal agreements, but we do a
lot of informal partnerships. One of the things that actually
all of our services do is that we are on different committees
and meetings that we sit in to support and provide information,
as well as we do referrals, and we do programs and activities
together.
Senator Hirono. So, is this in any kind of a formal way? Is
there some kind of a group committee that you do this through?
Ms. Morita. We do not have a formal group or committee, but
what we do have is the military Family Advocacy Coordinating
Council. And what that is is a program that is actually been
around for numerous years, and I would like to say about 20
years, approximately 20 years. And what we did is we got
together. And it is something that we continue to meet all the
different branches of services on it as well as the Coast
Guard.
We have civilian agencies that come and share information
and resources. Some of them attend regularly, some we invite as
we see trends in the community or friction points or things
that we can get together to talk about, and different programs
or our different needs that we are seeing.
Senator Hirono. Do you think that perhaps a more formal
kind of a group would be helpful to enhance and strengthen the
collaboration between the civilian and the military provider
community?
Ms. Morita. We are also--you know, we certainly can look at
anything that could enhance collaboration and us working
together.
Senator Hirono. Because the resources are getting actually
less for a problem that defies easy solutions.
Ms. Morita. We definitely want work together to ensure that
we are providing the best services for our families.
Senator Hirono. I definitely share your concerns. We
definitely want to work together to make sure we are providing
the best services for our families.
Miss Ogden, you hosted me on a visit to your Pearl Harbor's
Family Advocacy facility, and I thank you for that.
Expanding on Miss Morita's response regarding some of the
common factors that apply to domestic violence, whether it is
happening in the military context or in the civilian context,
could you elaborate on it a little more. I know that the
Colonel provided some of that, but, you know, as a person who
is dealing on a day-to-day basis with the military families,
what are some really specific and unique factors exhibited by
military families experiencing domestic violence?
Ms. Ogden. Well, certainly those stressors around
deployment and the anticipation of separation and then
reintegration are challenges. I do think that all the military
branches put a lot of services in place because they know those
are stressors. So, to put things in place to do education for
not only servicemembers but also to the family members around
what are common things that come up as we approach this
anticipated separation, often more conflicts arise, people will
start emotionally kind of pushing away from one another.
We want to help educate them that that is a normal part of
the process. And so the more they--we can help them see that
that is normal, and here are ways to cope with that, keep
communication lines clear; you know, have a plan of action,
that that can help them not see that as something--some
personal failure or something that they are doing wrong.
And also for reintegration, we have lots of programs to try
to help them look at what are some of the things that have
happened since people were away and the one family member or
spouse that was left behind has had to run the show. So, now we
have to find a way to fit the deployed member back into the
family unit and what are some of the challenges with that and
how can we give them some skills and understanding so they can
reintegrate better.
I think for some of those very specific challenges that
they have as military members, there really are--because of
that recognition by the military, there has been a lot of
support services put in place to specifically address that.
Senator Hirono. And of course recognizing that the military
families do go outside of the military provider community to
access services in the private sector, so to the extent that
you have this kind of awareness about the specific stressors
and how to deal with them, there is a question as to whether
those--that kind of intelligence and information and approaches
are shared with the private providers, and whether that could
definitely be enhanced.
Ms. Ogden. Sure. I think there is also room for
enhancements. I think some of our partnerships, like say the
local schools, to help them understand what children--how
children are being impacted by this kind of separation. So, we
have gone specifically to the schools and helped educate the
administrators, the school administrators, and the teachers so
that they can also understand some of those, you know, very
military-specific stressors, and what they can do to help
support the military children and families, and also so that
they are aware of our military resources that are available.
I think Military One Source or Tricare, as they expand
their network of civilian providers, have also done--made
efforts to try to educate those providers about military-
specific stressors so that they can help those civilian
providers understand those challenges that are unique and help
to maybe learn some of the language that I think would help
make military families be able to feel comfortable going, you
know, outside and working with civilian providers. I think
there are efforts, yes.
Senator Hirono. I will get to my second round probably, but
my time is up, so I would like to turn to Senator Schatz for
his questions, and then followed by Congresswoman Hanabusa.
Senator Schatz. Thank you, Senator Hirono. My question is
for Miss Morita and Miss Ogden. Can you describe your staffing
structure and whether you have sufficient resources to meet the
need?
Ms. Morita. We actually have fairly similar staffing
structure. What we have on our impact home centers, so those
are social workers and nurses who do home visits to parents. We
have educators, staff educators, who do our trainings and
classes. We have victim advocates who provide victim advocacy
services, as I mentioned earlier. And as well as on the
clinical side, I might turn to Colonel Arincorayan to indicate
his clinical staffing.
Colonel Arincorayan. So, within our clinical staff, the
Family Advocacy Behavioral Health is part of the behavior
health service line. And within the behavioral service line, we
provide an array of behavioral health services.
An example is child and family behavioral service, patients
that are medical home, with the behavioral health. And so there
is--I would say we have a robust behavioral health service at
least to provide support for family advocacy families.
Senator Schatz. You have enough in the way of staffing?
Ms. Morita. To answer your question, so based on the
current case load, we are adequately resourced, but we are
always continually assessing our situation to see as we look at
the complexities of our cases.
Senator Schatz. And what is the reporting structure from
your FAP program. How does it work through the different
branches in the service?
Ms. Morita. In terms of reporting an incident?
Senator Schatz. No, I mean the chain of command. I mean who
is getting these data, who is being made aware of what is going
on in terms of the aggregate data? Obviously, for individual
cases, there is the question of restricted or unrestricted, but
who is keeping an eyeball on these programs from the standpoint
of providing services to servicemembers' families?
Colonel Arincorayan. In our program, the Army program, it
is not as similar as the Navy. We have prevention and the
treatment services that are under different commands.
The Family Advocacy, which falls under the Army Community
Services Prevention, belongs to the installation management
command. My service, the Behavioral Health Services, belongs to
the medical command, falls under the Surgeon General, the Army
surgeon general.
Senator Schatz. Does that make sense?
Colonel Arincorayan. At this point, it does. We would need
to, you know, look at their review, do a review of maybe a
bottom-up review analysis to see if it does make sense to keep
it the way it is or----
Senator Schatz. Okay, thank you. And then one additional
question for Miss Morita and Miss Ogden.
How do you develop best practices and how standardized are
these FAP programs. Do you have flexibility to implement it as
you see fit at each base and each installation or does this
come from big DOD?
My basic concern is that you want enough flexibility to
implement according to the individual needs. On the other hand,
there are best practices, and so you do not want each
administrator to develop a program on full cloth. So, I am
interested in where you get your best practices and your
standards, and how that gets developed.
Ms. Ogden. Absolutely, I think there is a framework that
the DOD, OSD has said now all branches of service, you will use
the same set of definitions, that is DOD maltreatment
definitions. We want you to all use the same process of the
committee that determines whether this meets those definitions
for abuse or neglect.
So, that is some that just--you know, just happened in the
last several years to try to get that consistency across all
branches of services so that DOD and OSD can really look that
we are comparing oranges to oranges. With the Navy has this
many members, the Army has this many, are we talking about the
same thing?
I think that is there, and that that has been a really
useful thing to try to get us using all those things--
frameworks.
But, speaking for the Navy, I can say that those best
practices, certainly our headquarters is also looking for best
practices, whether that is something that one, you know,
installation started up or some new evidence-based program, so
what they know they will certainly share and offer that with
all of the installations.
We are given the latitude to try things here, you know, and
to find things that work for our specific community. Any
command-specific, because each command can have a little
different flavor, so absolutely, we are given that.
Senator Schatz. Senator Hirono, if you will indulge me one
last question, it will save me a second round. My question is
about who is aggregating all of these data. And I think that is
for the Attorney General.
My concern is just as a general proposition. As we saw the
reporting of sexual assault in the military go up, we were I
think correctly informed that that was actually a good thing,
not a bad thing, because of people reporting it and more public
awareness around it. And I am not entirely sure whether the
increase in incidences of domestic violence is as a result of
an actual increase or an increase in services and reporting.
And I do not think we have time to address that particular
question, I am not sure it is knowable at this point, but the
question of who is aggregating data and analyzing it, I think
is not--there is no clear answer yet. Attorney General?
Attorney General Louie. The best answer I can give you is
the data that we are analyzing and aggregating does not
generally include military data. We get our data from the
police departments, prosecutors, from the judiciary. And where
military service people come into contact with those
institutions, then we may have some of that data.
But, I think to the extent--I mean I do not have any links
with the military directly. We do not get this data. I mean we
certainly could if those channels were opened up, but right
now, we do not aggregate any of that data on a regular
systemized basis.
Senator Schatz. That seems like something we ought to work
on as a community. I mean--I will stop there. Thank you.
Senator Hirono. Thank you, Senator.
Congresswoman Hanabusa.
Representative Hanabusa. Thank you, Senator Hirono. In your
testimony, is it Colonel Arincorayan?
Colonel Arincorayan. Yes, ma'am.
Representative Hanabusa. Or Miss Morita, your testimony,
you have pointed out something that I would like clarification
on. You said there are about 15,000 married active duty
soldiers with an average of 46 percent living on post and 54
percent living off post.
So, where they are living, does that affect who they may
report more to. In other words, if you are living off post, is
there a higher probability, for example, that if something were
to happen, that it would be H.P.D. on Oahu, for example, that
would be called, versus somebody within the military itself;
versus where you are living on post, it would be something that
would be of course covered by whatever your structure is in
place on post?
Ms. Morita. Well, certainly, where a servicemembers lives
can impact where they intersect with services.
A couple of things that might be important to note is our
reporting process. We--there is some mandated reporting
process. So, if a commander is aware that there has been an
incident, they are required to report back to us on post. As
well as we have agreements that if a member is arrested for
domestic violence, that report gets sent to the military
police, and then we are informed of the incident. It definitely
has an impact in terms of maybe who is the initial responder in
that situation.
Representative Hanabusa. Miss Ogden, do you have any
statistics like that as to your military and Air Force? Because
you are representing the Joint Base.
Ms. Ogden. Yes. We have just under 20,000 active duty Navy
and Air Force members, and approximately 24,000 family members.
Of those, most Air Force families, that is 83 percent
approximately, currently live on installations. So, their first
responders would be military law enforcement.
Our Navy families is pretty much the opposite, where only
14 percent of our Navy families live on installation. The rest
would be living out on the economy or in the public, private
venture housing, which is also the primary--while it is
Federal, is the primary jurisdiction of H.P.D. but I know that
they will also contact our military law enforcement folks and
sometimes decide who will take that case further.
Representative Hanabusa. One of the issues that we have
always struggled with in this area has been, for example, the
confidentiality of it. And I think it was attested to earlier
that there was a concern about how it may then affect the job
or the promotion structure of one spouse, whoever that spouse
may be, in terms of military.
So, in light of all of that, do you have any assessment as
to whether the way it is reported, in other words, what then
gets reported to the military police or whoever, then it goes
up the chain to the commander, that somehow that is affecting
the number of people who are actually seeking help. Because
they do not want that future for their family and their spouse
to be affected. Is that a criteria in their mind, do you see
being played out?
Ms. Morita. I know that one of the things that was
developed was the restricted report for that very reason. And
the intent behind it is that we wanted family members and
soldiers to be able to come forward to get services without
triggering that response, to give them time to find out what
services are available, as well as to seek treatment. So, that
is one of the things that the Department of Defense started was
the restricted report to address those issues.
Representative Hanabusa. But, is there at some point where
that restricted report becomes unrestricted when, for example,
there is a pattern of behavior or something like that, that it
just automatically then, you know, you do not have the benefit
of that protect--and the only reason I am asking this is
because the culture of the military is very different than our
private sector.
What is it about that culture--and we are just finding more
and more, as we have hearings in Washington, of what goes on
within our unformed personnel. It must even be different and a
greater concern among family members who do not even have that.
So, what then would happen. Is there something that says,
okay, at this point, you are no longer--because we know
military personnel do not have the same kind of rights that you
might have. Anyone know?
Colonel Arincorayan. I am going to just answer that, ma'am.
We--in speaking with the restricted reporting, we try as much
as possible to remain--keep confidentiality in all the cases
that occur. And if restricted reporting is granted to the
victim, there may be a threshold that we will meet that we no
longer can keep restricted reporting. It is usually when there
is imminent harm, imminent harm to the individual as well as
children that may be involved, then we must get commanders or
the appropriate authorities involved to mitigate risk. And that
is usually the time when we will break confidentiality.
Representative Hanabusa. So, it is something that is--that
can be broken given the set of circumstances. It is not
something that somebody just is entitled to, they will and that
can be broken depending on the criteria that----
Colonel Arincorayan. Defense policy, yes.
Representative Hanabusa. Thank you.
Senator Hirono. Thank you. I think that we recognize, and
particularly as both Congresswoman Hanabusa and I serve on the
Armed Services Committee for our respective bodies, that we are
dealing with a very unique environment with regard to the
military. And for Attorney General Louie also, regardless of
some numbers that we have seen that domestic violence is
decreasing, which I find kind of astounding, that 75 percent
decrease, you indicated that it is a problem.
We do not necessarily know the full extent of this problem
in either the military side or the civilian side, because just
as sexual assault is underreported, probably this is also
underreported. And so there is a whole other aspect of
information and education that is part of the components of how
we address this issue.
So, I think for the military, thank both of you for raising
that question of how do military victims, how safe do they feel
in coming forward. And it is probably an issue that we could--
that I am sure the military is wrestling with. And there is
restricted reporting for the Army. Is there restricted
reporting in the Navy?
Ms. Ogden. Yes.
Senator Hirono. But, we do not know what the cause and
effects are of putting these kinds of options available,
whether that results in more people feeling that they can come
forward and talk to you folks, access your services or not.
And in fact, you know, when it comes to the issue of sexual
assault in the military, we did get information from the
Pentagon as to how many instances were occurring and what was
being reported, what was being prosecuted. Is there that kind
of data gathering with regard to domestic violence in the
military?
Ms. Ogden. Well, I know relatively new is going to be the
form the data gathering will start here in October with the
severity codes. And that is where--that is going to be first
presented to Congress, I believe, in 2016. And that is where
all the branches of the military are going to be able to
partner, looking at domestic violence specifically and sexual
assault within an intimate partner relationship. And if it
meets criteria for abuse of moderate to severe level of abuse,
then those cases will be--that will be in our central registry
database that each of the branches of service have.
And then concurrently, we will then be notifying the
commands. The commands will know that this has been identified
as a case where they will be looking at the servicemember's
personnel record to then see what the command has done to take
some action. And that can be, you know--you know, it just means
to show that the command considered that. It does not mean they
have to have taken a specific action.
Senator Hirono. Excuse me, Miss Ogden. Is this requirement
for data gathering across all services?
Ms. Ogden. Yes.
Senator Hirono. So, this is a directive from the Pentagon--
--
Ms. Ogden. Yes.
Senator Hirono [continuing]. Or from Congress?
Ms. Ogden. And OSD is the one putting out all of the
information on this. We are starting to gather this data,
starting with all cases that are opened as 1 October.
Senator Hirono. That would be helpful to your efforts. I am
assuming this study will be made public, because the Attorney
General has mentioned that you have no data as to what is
happening in the military context on the incidence of domestic
violence.
Attorney General Louie. Yes, it stays only in the military.
We have no data at all.
Senator Hirono. So, I would like to ask all of you, we have
been talking about coordinated community response, and there
are MOU's with regard to State agencies, and there are
different efforts being made to provide a coordinated community
response, would you all agree that we can do better with
bringing all the parties together, and that efforts should be
made toward that goal?
Colonel Arincorayan. Certainly.
Attorney General Louie. I would certainly agree with that.
Ms. Morita. No.
Senator Hirono. That is called a trick question.
No, we need to be on the same page, because this is a
really tough community-wide problem.
Thank you very much. If my colleagues do not have further
questions, we will move on to Panel 2. Thank you very much.
Senator Hirono. So, on the second panel, I will do a brief
introduction as you are coming forward.
While that is being set up, I would like to start by
introducing our next panel, consisting of Nanci Kreidman. And
she is the Chief Executive Officer of Domestic Violence Action
Center, DVAC, and Marci Lopes.
Nanci has been working on addressing family violence in
Hawaii for 30 years and is widely recognized for her advocacy.
She has been honored for her work by a number of organizations,
including the YWCA and the National Association of Social
Workers.
Marci Lopes is an Executive Director of the Hawaii State
Coalition Against Domestic Violence. Marci has a master's
degree in counseling, psychology. And prior to serving as an
executive director of the coalition, Marci worked with Parents
And Children Together, a large and leading domestic violence
service provider in Hawaii.
Before we begin to hear testimony, I would like to swear
you in. If you can stand and raise your hand.
Do you affirm that the testimony you are about to give
before committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and
nothing but the truth?
Ms. Kreidman. I do.
Ms. Lopes. I do.
Senator Hirono. All right. We will start with you, Nanci.
STATEMENT OF NANCI KREIDMAN, CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE ACTION CENTER, HONOLULU, HAWAII
Ms. Kreidman. Okay. Thank you very much for bringing us
together. As I think was apparent in the first panel, there is
a kind of a climb we can all do together. So, the opportunity
to have our----
Senator Hirono. I think you need to speak into the----
Ms. Kreidman. I need to speak into the mic too, okay.
Thank you for inviting us here today. I think, as is
apparent to all of us during the first panel, there is some
work we can do together. So, having our Congressional
delegation involved in a conversation is key to moving forward.
The Domestic Violence Action Center, you probably already
know, provides direct services and community mobilization in
addressing domestic violence. We have a staff of 52 who are
dedicated to delivering direct services, professional training,
outreach, and participating in system reform work.
It is a complex problem, it is a costly problem, and it is
an enormous problem that touches all of our families, as you
have all said and our military colleagues have said. The
Domestic Violence Action Center has been involved in almost
every effort to examine the problem of domestic violence over
the last nearly 25 years. And it is our intention to stay in
the conversation. We work with thousands of families every
year. And it has not recently occurred to us but has occurred
to us some time ago that at least 10 percent and sometimes as
many as 20 percent of the families we are serving at any one
time are military families or military family members.
And we have wanted to help conversation with the Department
of Defense, with the Department of Justice, or military
colleagues and our own Congressional delegation about the
impact of serving the military community and the potential ways
it may be tracked to serve the civilian community. This does
not mean we are not willing to serve and work with the
military, but it does cost us money.
As a civilian non-profit agency, we are always yearning to
increase our revenues. And if we can receive the support and
the cooperation of the military, we think that would be the
best interest of the community as a whole.
You alluded earlier, Senator Hirono, to the data that we
collected. After beginning a conversation which was really
inspired by Adriana Ramelli from Sex Abuse Treatment Center at
the VAWA planning committee, the Domestic Action Center and
some of our other domestic violence programs designated a two-
week period of time when we were going to lift out the number
of people that our staff serves.
We did that. We instructed all of our staff to make an
inquiry about who it is that they were providing safety
planning with, who it is that they were making contacts. Our
staff provides long-term advocacy and legal representation to
victims of domestic violence or survivors of domestic violence.
In that two-week period, which was September 15 through
September 30th, safety planning was conducted 40 times.
Safety planning is not an event; it is--rather, it is a
process. When circumstances change, we revisit the threats to a
person and examine what kinds of things that they may need to
make that their safety plan. That is a very exhaustive process.
Again, it is an important one for all the people we have
contact with.
Our staff made 104 contacts with the military clients that
they were working with just during that two-week period, and 52
additional contacts with other people out in the community. As
people are navigating their way to safety, there are lots of
encounters with other agencies.
So, our work is to make sure that the rest of the people
they are interacting with, understand the challenges,
understand the pathway, understand the risks. That is a big
commitment by our staff in support of the military. Again, we
are happy to be there to be able to help our military families,
but it comes at a cost to our civilian community, quite
honestly.
The other thing that is maybe a little bit delicate, but
something that I would really like to place on the table, and
that is depending on the branch of the military and the
individual command, we have different degrees of cooperation
and responsiveness.
Some of the survivors we work with face a lot of challenges
and many obstacles to getting safe, to getting services that
they need, to getting their abusers held accountable. The
opportunity to engage in greater conversation and maybe more
collaboration in a coordinated fashion, we think would be in
the best interest of the survivors who might be having
difficulty with the branch or the commander.
So, we are on board. These are just a few thoughts and
conversation, and I hope we can continue to have. Again, my
thanks for each of you coming and convening our community.
[The prepared statement of Nanci Kreidman appears as a
submission for the record.]
Senator Hirono. Thank you.
Miss Lopes.
STATEMENT OF MARCI LOPES, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, HAWAII STATE
COALITION AGAINST DOMESTIC VIOLENCE,
HONOLULU, HAWAII
Ms. Lopes. Thank you for this opportunity. I would briefly
like to take a few minutes to share with you all that my father
went to Viet Nam when I was three days old. He went on to have
a 21-year career with the United States Army. Upon retiring
from the Army, he has enjoyed a 25-plus-year career working for
the VA.
My husband also has 21 years of service to the military.
For the past 11 and a half years, he has and continues to
proudly serve our Air National Guard. So, I have an intimate
understanding of the challenges many of our military families
face.
I am the Executive Director for the Hawaii State Coalition
Against Domestic Violence. I started this position in March of
this year. Our coalition is a membership of 22 organizations
statewide. They all provide domestic violence services. Our
mission is to engage communities and organization to end
domestic violence through education, advocacy, and action for
social change.
I am speaking today about some of the life saving services
provided to the residents of Hawaii because of the existence of
VAWA and FVPSA.
The island of Oahu reported to me the greatest demands on
services being accessed by the military members and dependents.
The island of Oahu provides aid for families from the Air
Force, Army, Navy, Marines, Coast Guard, as well as the
National Guard and Army Reserves. Services are not only
accessed by legal dependents, they are also accessed by
intimate partners who may not be married to the servicemember.
We also have adult children and other family members who are
accessing our services.
Since this passage in 1984, FVPSA has remained the only
direct Federal funding source for our shelters. FVPSA currently
funds non-domestic violence emergency shelters statewide. I
have to take this unique opportunity to share that our shelters
in Hawaii are still recovering from funding cuts that they
experienced in 2008.
Our Molokai shelter, the most isolated of our shelters,
reported to me this morning that they are functioning with a 45
percent budget cut that they experienced in 2008.
I attached in my information to you the most recent shelter
utilization data. So, we have nine shelters, four operating on
Oahu, two are operated by Child and Family Service, one in
Honolulu and one in Leeward. We have one operated by Parenting
Children Together that services families in Kaneohe. And we
have one operated by the Women's Spouse Abuse Shelter in
Waialua.
The Hawaii island operates two shelters by Child and Family
Service, one in Hilo and one in Kona. We have one shelter
operated by the YWCA in Kauai, and one operated in Maui by
Women Helping Women. We also have our Molokai shelter operated
by the Molokai Community Council Hale Ho'omalu.
There is a military shelter available on Oahu, but it is
not staffed. Active duty and spouses can access that shelter
after contacting the military crisis line and getting a
referral. Victims are only allowed to stay two weeks. If they
need additional time, that has to be approved by the chain of
command.
Oahu service providers have shared that many military
victims prefer to access local shelters because they have staff
available 24/seven, they can stay 90 days, and they do not
trust the military restricted and unrestricted reporting
levels.
Victims have also reported that they are fearful that the
perpetrators's chain of command will not be able to keep them
safe and to hold their abuser accountable. When events occur
off base, there are jurisdiction challenges. If the police
department makes a report because the event took place off
base, victims and perpetrators can choose to access services
off base.
If the Hawaii judicial system is involved, they can mandate
military personnel to better intervention programs. We have two
service providers on Oahu that provide better intervention
services. They are Parents And Children Together and Child and
Family Service.
If a victim in Hawaii applies for a restraining order, a
child welfare case is started. And so many of military families
are also involved in child welfare services. So, we have three
agencies who provide services for those families. Child and
Family Service for Leeward Oahu, the Domestic Violence Action
Center for Central Oahu, and Parents And Children Together for
windward Oahu.
If a military dependent child is in need of counseling
services, they can access the Parents And Children Together,
Family Peace Center program. The military does not have
therapeutic groups for children at this time, but I was told
they do have individual and counseling services for the
families available on some facilities.
Because of a lack of affordable housing and the inventory
of housing in the open market, many of our victims are
returning to their abuser or becoming homeless as a result of
their domestic violence. The Violence Against Women Act
provides much needed transitional housing programs on our
island, but it is still not enough. Only three of our islands
are benefiting from this transitional housing program.
On Oahu, we have Child and Family Service, who is able to
provide services for victims and their children. Parents And
Children Together operates a transitional home for single women
only. That is eight beds. Maui has Women Helping Women, has a
transitional housing program that does service women and
children. And then Hawaii island, Child and Family Service has
a transitional housing program for victims and children.
Oahu also receives Safe Haven and State judicial funding
for supervised visitation centers. Visitation centers operate
to keep children and victims safe while families are going
through the TRO process, a custody dispute, or a highly
conflicted divorce. If visitation is not handled properly, if
it is children at risk for being abused, kidnapped, or further
harm to the custodial parent, many military families are
accessing the visitation center. They are able to provide Skype
visits for families that are deployed or have been stationed
off-island. So, that services is being accessed.
And there is one center on Oahu for all of our families.
They service over 250 families a year, over 3,000 visits. There
is a waiting list. And families get an hour and a half visit
per week if they are lucky.
Senator Hirono. Can you wrap up, Miss Lopes. We have your
full testimony.
Ms. Lopes. I will end there. We have many dedicated service
providers. We have a great need for legal services. And I want
to thank you for your continued support.
[The prepared statement of Marci Lopes appears as a
submission for the record.]
Senator Hirono. Thank you.
I understand that Senator Schatz has to leave, so thank you
very much for joining us. We can look forward together.
This is for Miss Lopes, because you are the--you oversee a
lot, you collect data from a number of programs, and there are
quite a few of them, although the need is still greater than
the resources.
The Attorney General said that of the VAWA funding, a
portion of it goes to you folks. And how do you decide which
shelters or which island, how they get VAWA money or do they
get VAWA money?
Ms. Lopes. The coalition does not make that decision. The
AG's office determines that. We are able to give input during
the planning meetings.
Senator Hirono. So, for clarification then, the Attorney
General actually designates within the Molokai shelter who will
get what amount?
Ms. Lopes. FVPSA is the only one that funds shelters, and
that is not the Attorney General's funding.
Senator Hirono. Whatever the Attorney General funding
decisions are, they do the decisions.
Ms. Kreidman. It is a competitive process. Everybody makes
a proposal, submits it to the Attorney General's office, and
they have a process.
Senator Hirono. I see. Thank you. So, I asked our Panel 1
people that as we focus on the coordinated community response,
I think you indicated that depending on which service,
depending on which commander, because a commander of a facility
or installations have a lot of leeway as to how things proceed
under their command, that we could do--we could do more to
facilitate the ability of you folks in particular to be able to
provide the kind of services to the military people who are
coming to you get.
So, in your experience, we talked about in the first
panel--well, first of all, let me ask whether you agree that we
could do better----
Ms. Lopes. Absolutely.
Ms. Kreidman. Yes.
Senator Hirono. [continuing]. However way we structure
this. Do you think a more formal way of communicating with the
military would help in Hawaii than what exists right now?
Ms. Kreidman. Yes.
Senator Hirono. With regard to the very specific
experiences that may be stressors for domestic violence, Miss
Kreidman, as you provide direct services, are there some very
specific ways that you work with military victims that you may
not do with other victims as you do your safety planning?
For example, I was informed that you are concerned about
the access to firearms more with the military people that you
work with. Can you just talk a little bit about what kind of
unique circumstances that they need to provide a different kind
of services in the military.
Ms. Kreidman. I think that is a trick question, too.
Senator Hirono. It is not meant to be.
Ms. Kreidman. There are factors that are true for all
survivors. There are root causes that are--that exist in all
battering relationships. The uniqueness of a military family
member being victimized by her perpetrator has something to do
with her isolation, her lack of familiarity with the community
that she is in, the lack of confidence she may have in her
husband's command, the ability to know when it is appropriate
to ask for what, the level of lethality in the relationship
that needs to be assessed, the kind of responsibilities and
maybe work schedules of their partner or perpetrator needs to
be understood.
We do not start our assessment or our support as if they
are very different populations. We start with the assumption
that there is some very strong similarities between what is
happening for the victim in the civilian community and victim
in the military community. And then we distill out the parts of
the relationship or the danger or the perpetrator's role in the
military to figure out is there something special or different
or more intensive that we must do in order to assure her access
to the right kind of services and in the right order, and
taking things into consideration the lethality that she is
facing.
Senator Hirono. So, as you are doing the safety planning,
it sounds as though it is a very individualized process. If you
know that you are dealing with someone from the military,
though, does that trigger certain kinds of questions that you
would ask regarding their particular situation and what
concerns they may have about accessing you folks as opposed to
the military services?
Ms. Kreidman. Yes. It is also evident to us, because it has
been disclosed over and over again, that they come to us
because they do not find the military resources either safe or
have the confidence in them because of the--earlier, we said
that all reports are made to military police. That may or may
not be a good thing for a particular--and the level of fear and
terror and torment that a victim is experiencing is exacerbated
by the lack of familiarity with the community they are in, the
installation they are on. And----
Senator Hirono. So, the military is concerned about how to
deal with it, and one of the responses has been to allow for
restrictive reporting. This could be an area, though, from a
civilian provider, community standpoint that maybe better,
strong communication as to what is causing the military
families to not go to the military, maybe there are other
approaches that could be implemented by the military to address
the situation.
A lot of my questions have to do with trying to understand
what is out there and what does the military person who, as you
say, is away from familiar surroundings, and how do they--how
do you think they get the information as to what is available
for them if they are the victim of domestic violence? And I am
talking about the majority of the cases probably do not have
police involvement or not.
I do not know what percentage of the cases H.P.D., for
example, on Oahu are involved or what percentage of the
domestic violence situations are people who do not want to
involve the police but who seek help.
Ms. Kreidman. Well, just to give you an example, we have a
program on site at court. Every person who is petitioning
Family Court for a restraining order has the opportunity to
have a conversation with a staff member from the Domestic
Violence Action Center. The military families use our Family
Court system in the same way that the civilian community does.
That is one place where we would meet people who work with
Domestic Violence Action Center so they could be referred at
that point to additional services in the civilian community.
If there are 54 percent of military families living off
post, any encounter with law enforcement would be our civilian
police. And they are certainly familiar with our domestic
violence programs and would make referrals to our domestic
violence programs.
I am not as well acquainted with how the--how the
communication goes or the collaboration occurs between the
Honolulu Police Department and the military base, although I
know that there is improved communication among them.
Senator Hirono. I am told that if H.P.D. is involved and if
there is an arrest, then that information goes to the command.
My time is up.
Now, Congresswoman Hanabusa.
Representative Hanabusa. Thank you, Senator. Nanci, let
us--first of all, I just want to say it is typical of you to
just cut to the chase; that if we do more military, it is going
to take away from civilian. And that really is--that really is
a concern. I mean, I can see that.
But, can you give me an idea of how much--as you are
gathering data, how much of the numbers that you would service
or potentially could be servicing could have the military
relationship. Do you have any idea of what that might be as you
are now being more sensitive in gathering this particular piece
of data?
Ms. Kreidman. I am not sure I understand your question. I
am thinking that if we are serving 15 percent of our people at
any given time, our military family members----
Representative Hanabusa. Right.
Ms. Kreidman [continuing]. If we had funds, we could
increase our resources so that we could also be serving 15
percent of the civilian community whose cases we cannot open or
accept.
Representative Hanabusa. That is exactly what I was
thinking about. Because what you were saying was you know, if
you handle the military, which is not something I am objecting
to, but it also means you cannot handle this civilian
population. There is no compensation is what I heard. So, it is
about 15 percent or something like that.
I guess I am trying to figure out, the resources are
limited all the way around, but it seems like if it is a
service that is being provided, that it is a service that
should be compensated somehow, because you get it back. I
mean----
Ms. Kreidman. I am not sure even if the military branches
have specialized legal services for those victims of domestic
violence in the same way that we do.
Representative Hanabusa. Right.
Now, the other thing that I was reading in your testimony
that caught my eye was when you said from 2009 to 2014, 37.2 of
all divorce cases sampled in the State Judiciary, at least one
member was military. And I just want to be clear, when you
define military, was the definition of the military used active
duty versus Guard and Reserve. Do you see the difference that I
am trying to draw?
Ms. Kreidman. I think it is both.
Representative Hanabusa. It is both.
Ms. Kreidman. I think it is both. That came out of a report
issued by----
Representative Hanabusa. Right, I saw it here.
Ms. Kreidman [continuing]. Family Court. Yes.
Representative Hanabusa. So, do you know or are you
familiar enough with the report to know, though it may be, you
know, no-fault divorce, whether how many of them may have been
related to issues of domestic violence. Do you have any idea.
If you do----
Ms. Kreidman. I do not know.
Representative Hanabusa. I am going to move now to Marci.
And, Marci, I want to thank you for your testimony because you
are very detailed in the military impact.
The one thing that I was wondering about, because it seemed
like given the nature of the military families, especially
those active duty in a new place, you know, because they serve
two to three years max and are moving on, that you did mention
that there is just one shelter available, but there is no one
that staff that is shelter. Right?
And yet, we do know, and then you also said that the FVPSA
program is the only one that funds shelters. Yet, we all know
that VAWA funds transitional housing. So, is transitional
housing once the person decides to move completely out versus a
sheltered situation?
Ms. Lopes. It could be either one. They could go from an
emergency shelter to transitional; or if they are working with
an advocate that is unable to refer them directly to the
transitional housing program, that can happen. And sometimes
DVAC or Hawaii Immigrant Justice Center, they have advocates
working on legal issues with them and they are able to get them
into transition.
Representative Hanabusa. Because it would seem that for a
military person who is being abused and needs shelter, that
they need to be out of that situation. But, as was testified,
they find themselves returning because there is no alternative,
there is no family structure here. For most cases, they are
isolated. And, where do they turn to? So, it is almost like
forcing them back into the situation. Would that be a correct
assessment?
Ms. Lopes. Yes, ma'am.
Representative Hanabusa. Another thing you said is that
they do not trust the chain of command; that the chain of
command--it is almost like an assumption that the chain of
command will protect whoever is in the service, and they do not
feel that they will be in any way protected from that. Is that
the sense that you are getting from the military?
Ms. Lopes. The majority of the victims, yes.
Representative Hanabusa. So, this is not a trick question.
In a situation like this where we do, and you went to great
detail to show your understanding of being a member of a
military family, plus a spouse of somebody who has very strong
military ties, now what do you do then? I mean, how do you
address something as fundamental as where do they turn?
Ms. Lopes. I think we have a unique situation here in
Hawaii because we are so isolated. The coalition operates a
program called Flight To Freedom. And if we do have victims
that need to leave the island because they are in imminent
danger, we use our funds to help them, fly them to their family
and their support system.
Representative Hanabusa. So, it is putting them back into
their 'ohana, in other words?
Ms. Lopes. Yes.
Representative Hanabusa. And is that the most effective way
that you have found, in the experiences that you have for
those, that clearly this would probably be a category that does
not qualify, restricted report would probably be unrestricted.
But, is this the best solution for them?
Ms. Lopes. It depends on their safety; if they are really
terrified and they feel that their life's in danger, they want
out of here as quickly as possible.
But, I also have to note that the past two to three years,
we have seen many women meet servicemembers online. And they
are flying over here to Hawaii, depleting all of their savings,
and finding out that this person is an abuser. And now they are
stranded here in Hawaii and they are accessing our shelters,
and we are trying to get them back. That is also a challenge
that we are having right now.
Representative Hanabusa. Can you give us an idea of how
many of these Flights To Freedom in a particular year, or
however you keep your data, and where do you find the money?
Ms. Lopes. We solicit foundations, private grants. And
after speaking with Cody, we learned the value that we should
be tracking how many military servicemembers we are providing
this to. But, it is a very special fund that we use.
And after we purchase the tickets, we try and destroy any
evidence that we ever made this purchase. And so we have the
total numbers of tickets that we purchased, but we do not keep
any identifying information. I do not have the numbers in my
mind right now, but we can get that to you.
Representative Hanabusa. Okay. So that is the ultimate that
they can look to?
Ms. Lopes. Immediately.
Ms. Kreidman. That is also negotiation that occurs around
early return of dependents that is sometimes employed when a
person needs to leave.
Representative Hanabusa. Thank you.
Thank you, Senator.
Senator Hirono. Okay, back to the Flights To Freedom. So,
did you say that you do not have the information as to how much
your organizations have spent to return spouses?
Ms. Lopes. We have the total, but we have not been keeping
track of which are military dependents. We have not been
keeping that data. We recently started tracking that.
Senator Hirono. And you use your own resources to return
abused persons to a much more supportive environment?
Ms. Lopes. Yes.
Senator Hirono. And, Nanci, you are right that the military
does have an early release of dependents which is similar to
return the dependents to a much safer situation. So, that has
been another one of the military's responses in how to best
provide that.
Ms. Lopes. And I believe that is only if they are married
dependents.
Senator Hirono. There may be restrictions, and this could
be yet another identifying of how best the civilian and the
military community can work together.
I am having difficulty figuring out whether there are
overlaps to the services provided by the civilian side and the
military side. Do the people come to you. Basically, they just
come to you, they are not accessing the military services?
Ms. Lopes. If a victim calls the shelter and is taken into
a shelter, if she discloses that she would like the shelter
advocates, the local advocates, to work with the family
advocacy programs, they will. But, that is completely up to the
victim. It is her decision.
Senator Hirono. So, if the victim chooses to use the FAP
program, then you do not provide the services that FAP is
providing to that person.
Ms. Lopes. Right.
Ms. Kreidman. That is entirely the same for us. Sometimes
we work very closely with the Family Advocacy Program. And some
of the services that we provide are a little bit different, so
we try. It is entirely up to the survivor, where she wants to
get help and in what ways. Sometimes there is a good
collaboration between the Domestic Violence Action Center and
the Family Advocacy Program, sometimes not so for a variety of
different reasons. There is not really duplication. Sometimes
there is cooperation, and sometimes they come to DVAC and that
is all that they--the entirety of their support.
Senator Hirono. It has been mentioned by all of us many
times that the resources are scarce. And while you are great at
raising money and advocating for that, let us assume there will
be no additional funds. And in fact, I believe that Attorney
General in his testimony said the VAWA funding has not
increased in five years, even as we have expanded, by the way,
the groups and people that VAWA will not protect. So, we have
to be very creative here.
What would you say would be the biggest challenge that you
would like to have a coordinated community response team
address with regard to your ability, your group's ability, to
help servicemembers of families?
Ms. Kreidman. I think I need to understand what we mean
when we use the phrase coordinated community response. Who
comes to the table, what is the work we are doing together.
What are the expectations that everybody brings when they come
to the table. What can we agree on. What is the work that needs
to be forged so that we are not duplicating services and we are
cooperating?
I do not really know exactly what we mean by a coordinated
community response between civilian and the military
communities. Maybe that is a first step.
Senator Hirono. Yes.
Ms. Kreidman. Again, since we have got five different
branches of the military and each one of them is their own
little domain, that in and of itself is a kind of a challenge.
The Army may want to approach it one way, the Marines may want
to approach it in a different way, the Air Force may want to
approach it in a different way.
So, is the coordination among the branches and the civilian
community or is the coordination between a branch and a
civilian community. I am not entirely certain.
Senator Hirono. I would say that this is why going forward,
it does behoove us to at least use the same terminology and
come to a common understanding. Would you want to add anything
to what Miss Kreidman has said?
Ms. Lopes. I believe that the military has lots of training
resources that we could better utilize.
Senator Hirono. Training resources?
Ms. Lopes. They bring excellent trainers over. But, we have
not been able to coordinate. I think it is a goal. And Cindy
recently joined our fatality review team, and she has been able
to share now some of the training resources that we have. I
think that is an easy way that we can start coordinating.
Senator Hirono. So, as you sit there, Nanci, this is--or we
are going to be ending this hearing earlier, and which is good,
yes, and--good.
As you are thinking about there are some ways that we can
move things along, feel free. I will turn to Congresswoman
Hanabusa for additional questions.
Representative Hanabusa. Thank you. I just--I am kind of
stuck. The reason I am stuck is because I am trying to
understand this from the perspective of the victim or the
person who is seeking help. And that person who seeks help,
Nanci, you said DVAC may be the only----
Ms. Kreidman. Right.
Representative Hanabusa [continuing]. Agency that they
choose to go with. And it seems like at some point that if you
are coordinating, that it would--and if we are, quote, getting
compensated for expenses, which is a logical thing to happen,
but then the question becomes what about the person who is
seeking the help? If that person does not want anything--any
knowledge of this to go back to the military, for whatever that
reasons may be, and wants to just seek help from DVAC or from
one of your groups, how do we do that? Because it seems like in
the process, we are losing sight of the person who is seeking
the help.
Ms. Lopes. We would never disclose any military connections
or information if she did not want us to. It would only be if
she preferred that we contact them. She can completely come and
access all of our member programs with complete
confidentiality.
Representative Hanabusa. No, I agree. But, the reality of
how do you then do the funding, right. How do you get
compensated for that. As Nanci put it so aptly, as she does, in
the beginning, taking money away as a community, not that the
community does not want to, but you are limited; everybody is
limited in the amount of resources. And it would seem that this
is something that you are doing a service to the military as
well.
But, you know, that is the difficulty that I am having. And
I am not sure that the military would be willing to just pick a
number. We have three this month, take our word for it, we will
sign an affidavit that we have three this month.
Do you understand what I am getting at. I am just trying
figure out how does the person fit into what we are talking
about?
Ms. Kreidman. A person might have sought assistance from
the military several times and did not get the outcome that was
supportive to her, at which point she may seek help someplace
else. Sometimes that is how we get our military family member
survivor clients.
I do not know. I think we have to figure that out. Through
the coordination, and through the cooperation, and through the
increased and improved communication, we might figure out how
to report. We report to other funding sources lots of details
without disclosing who the clients are that we are serving.
Representative Hanabusa. Because I think for a lot, if a
client is seeking help from you and wants that level of
confidentiality, it probably has to do with the spouse, and not
wanting that spouse to be affected in any way, you know, that
which may or may not be--it is probably not good for the
military not to know. You know, they should know if they have
somebody who is abusing or something. And as a result of that,
they should know. But, yet, it is this tension.
I do not know what the answer is. I threw it out. Thank
you.
Thank you very much, Senator.
Senator Hirono. So, as with sexual assault, we want to
encourage reporting in the civilian community as well as in the
military community. And I think it is also important to keep in
mind that the military, they are very much a part of our
community, and they should be able to access services wherever
they feel comfortable. When we get down to some of the nitty-
gritty of how the resources can come together to do as best as
we can, then that is another matter for a coordinated response.
It is very clear that this is a very complicated situation.
It is very complicated, with no easy solutions. And so as we go
forward, I do ask our military colleagues who are here and our
civilian community for cooperation as we go forward, because,
you know, as I mentioned in my opening statement, I do
anticipate moving forward with a collaboration model that is
more than you all should be talking together more.
All right. I would like to see a model that can be
implemented. And we are certainly--I certainly will be
interested to know if other jurisdictions have models that we
can follow. And there must be, because when VAWA was first
enacted, it did have the military collaboration component as
part of a community response.
It takes willing hearts to go there. And as I close this
hearing, I do want to thank all of you for being here. It is a
community-wide issue. And we will go forward together with as
much frankness as we can so that we can, first of all,
understand what we are dealing with, and how we can do a more
effective job with the limited resources that we all have.
The minutes or the record of the hearing will remain open
for another week so any community persons, any legislators,
anyone who wants to submit further testimony or statements to
the committee, can do so in one week.
And with that, I thank all of you, and adjourn this
hearing.
[Whereupon, at 11:51 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
[Additional material submitted for the record follows.]
A P P E N D I X
Additional Material Submitted for the Record
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]