    [House Hearing, 116 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                             [H.A.S.C. No. 116-44]

                         SHATTERED FAMILIES, SHATTERED

                       SERVICE: TAKING MILITARY DOMESTIC

                          VIOLENCE OUT OF THE SHADOWS

                                   __________

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

                                     OF THE

                          COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES

                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                         ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                  HEARING HELD

                               SEPTEMBER 18, 2019

    [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                   __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    41-472                      WASHINGTON : 2020

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                       SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

                     JACKIE SPEIER, California, Chairwoman

    SUSAN A. DAVIS, California           TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
    RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona               RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana
    GILBERT RAY CISNEROS, Jr.,           LIZ CHENEY, Wyoming
        California, Vice Chair           PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan
    VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas              JACK BERGMAN, Michigan
    DEBRA A. HAALAND, New Mexico         MATT GAETZ, Florida
    LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
    ELAINE G. LURIA, Virginia
                    Craig Greene, Professional Staff Member
                              Dan Sennott, Counsel
                             Danielle Steitz, Clerk

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

                  STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

    Kelly, Hon. Trent, a Representative from Mississippi, Ranking
      Member, Subcommittee on Military Personnel.....................     3
    Speier, Hon. Jackie, a Representative from California,
      Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Military Personnel.................     1

                                   WITNESSES

    Clubb, Brian, Coordinator, Military & Veterans Advocacy Program,
      Battered Women's Justice Program...............................    13
    Hughes, Rohini, Survivor and Advocate............................     7
    Johnston, A.T., Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for
      Military and Community and Family Policy Department of Defense;
      and Kenneth Noyes, Associate Director, DOD Family Advocacy
      Program (Military Family Readiness Policy), Department of
      Defense........................................................    28
    Lee, David S., Director of Prevention Services, PreventConnect...    12
    Olszewski, Leah, Survivor and Advocate...........................     6
    Ranta, Kate, Survivor and Advocate...............................     4
    Vassell, Arlene, Vice President of Programs, Prevention, and
      Social Change, National Resource Center on Domestic Violence...    10

                                    APPENDIX

    Prepared Statements:

        Clubb, Brian.................................................   109
        Hughes, Rohini...............................................    67
        Johnston, A.T., joint with Kenneth Noyes.....................   117
        Lee, David S.................................................    95
        Olszewski, Leah..............................................    53
        Ranta, Kate..................................................    43
        Speier, Hon. Jackie..........................................    41
        Vassell, Arlene..............................................    81

    Documents Submitted for the Record:

        [There were no Documents submitted.]

    Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:

        [There were no Questions submitted during the hearing.]

    Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:

        [There were no Questions submitted post hearing.]

        SHATTERED FAMILIES, SHATTERED SERVICE: TAKING MILITARY DOMESTIC
                          VIOLENCE OUT OF THE SHADOWS

                                  ----------

                      House of Representatives,
                           Committee on Armed Services,
                            Subcommittee on Military Personnel,
                         Washington, DC, Wednesday, September 18, 2019.
        The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:07 p.m., in
    room 2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jackie Speier
    (chairwoman of the subcommittee) presiding.

    OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JACKIE SPEIER, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
       CALIFORNIA, CHAIRWOMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

        Ms. Speier. Good afternoon. This hearing will come to
    order. I want to welcome everyone to this hearing of the
    Military Personnel Subcommittee on domestic violence in the
    military.
        We are here today because domestic violence has become a
    forgotten crisis in our military. It has been 15 years since
    the DOD [Department of Defense] task force analyzed domestic
    violence within the military, yet we have seen unsettling
    warning signs since. Within the last few months, DOD reports
    have highlighted concerning failures in our services' domestic
    violence prevention systems. The DOD has not responded
    urgently.
        Today, we will hear from three survivors of domestic
    violence in the military who are bravely coming forward to
    share their experiences in the hopes that others may be helped.
    Their stories are riveting, they are painful, and they are
    real. Because we lack data that is recent, plentiful, or
    granular, we must rely on survivors, advocates, and experts to
    help us understand the unique challenges of dealing with this
    crisis within the military.
        Major Leah Olszewski is still on the run from a violent
    abuser. Air Force officials at every level refused to help her
    despite knowing of past incidents.
        Kate Ranta found justice in the civilian--not military--
    court system but only after her violent ex-husband, who was
    allowed to go free and retire from the Air Force, shot her and
    her father.
        Rohini Hughes and her son Jay were verbally and physically
    abused by her husband, who as a JAG [judge advocate general],
    used his knowledge of the system against her.
        These incidents impact victims, families, communities. The
    DOD must learn to believe survivors and take action based on
    their claims and evidence. Denial, favoritism, and a complex
    bureaucracy cannot shield dangerous perpetrators.
        Domestic violence is not unique to the military. According
    to the CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention], 1 in 4
    women and nearly 1 in 10 men have experienced intimate partner
    violence in their lifetimes. And, as with civilian domestic
    violence, there is no, quote, typical, unquote, military
    domestic violence case. That means policy must account for and
    address a wide range of potential aggravating factors.
        Adverse childhood experiences may create a propensity for
    domestic violence. Poor role models can make it hard to
    peacefully resolve conflicts. Law enforcement providing access
    to child care and early education, military leadership,
    Congress, and the criminal justice system all have roles to
    play.
        But we must also mitigate the factors of military life that
    can exacerbate the risks of domestic violence. Families cope
    with new responsibilities, frequent moves, and tough
    challenges. Service members may be consumed by military duties
    and struggling with post-traumatic or other stresses and a
    thirst for high-risk behaviors after multiple deployments.
        Military spouses are often isolated, underemployed, and
    struggling to make ends meet, living far from friends or
    family, and unfamiliar with local resources. It is,
    unfortunately, easy to see how these conditions can make
    domestic violence possible, more dangerous, and persistent.
        When young men and women join the military, they become our
    responsibility as one of our Nation's most precious resources.
    We are equally responsible for military families who sacrifice
    along with the service member. And we are responsible for
    military children because exposure to domestic violence has
    long-term effects and because military children are
    disproportionately likely to join the military themselves.
        I believe the military takes this problem seriously, but it
    is clear that leadership needs to address this threat with
    renewed urgency. Commanders at every level need to make
    combating domestic violence a personal--and I underscore that--
    a personal priority.
        In recent years, Congress has added a UCMJ [Uniform Code of
    Military Justice] domestic violence criminal article, required
    new reporting on DOD's prevention and response systems, and
    explored expanding special victims' attorneys to cover domestic
    violence. There is far more to be done, and I hope to learn
    about some of these options today.
        Today, we will be joined by two panels. The first will
    consist of military domestic violence survivors and experts. On
    the second, we will have DOD officials responsible for
    designing and implementing relevant policies.
        We will focus on three main questions during today's
    hearing. First, are we taking the crime of domestic violence
    seriously enough? Who does it effect, and what happens to them?
    Second, how should we prevent domestic violence, reach out to
    and care for survivors, and deal with perpetrators? Third, what
    do current DOD programs look like? What are their strengths,
    and how can we further improve them?
        Before I introduce our first panel, I would like to offer
    Ranking Member Kelly an opportunity to make opening remarks.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Speier can be found in the
    Appendix on page 41.]

         STATEMENT OF HON. TRENT KELLY, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
    MISSISSIPPI, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL

        Mr. Kelly. Thank you, Chairwoman Speier, for having this
    very important hearing today. And this is an issue that I have
    been engaged in since I was a city prosecutor in 1999 at the
    misdemeanor level and later as a district attorney at the
    felony level, and I know of no more serious issue than domestic
    violence and what it does to families and lives and all those
    around who surround.
        I wish to welcome both of our panels to today's hearing. I
    particularly want to thank you three survivors of domestic
    abuse and for your bravery and your willingness to share your
    stories here today and the issues in your story.
        Domestic abuse is a serious national issue. On average,
    nearly 20 people a minute in the United States are physically
    abused by a partner. Unfortunately, the military is not immune
    to this national problem. Domestic violence in the military has
    lasting negative effects on not just the family in which it
    occurs but also in the military community as a whole.
        It is imperative that the Department of Defense have a
    comprehensive prevention and response program to ensure that
    military families have the resources needed to identify and
    prevent domestic abuse and that survivors of domestic abuse
    have the legal, medical, and behavioral health resources needed
    to rebuild their lives and those affected by these acts.
        As a former district attorney and city prosecutor, I
    prosecuted domestic violence crimes and have put domestic
    abusers behind bars. I am a firm believer in education and
    transparency in order to prevent domestic violence situations.
        And when I say ``education,'' it is not just for the
    victims. It is for peers. It is for the abusers. It is for the
    chain of command. It is understanding what domestic violence is
    and is not, understanding what the solutions are, how to get to
    credible solutions. And it is very important and it is a long-
    term process to educate all those involved so that we know
    exactly how to deal with this problem because it is not
    acceptable that it stays even. We want it to get better.
        I know firsthand how difficult these cases can be to
    prosecute and how traumatic the process can be for the whole
    family. Many times they use power of separation from friends
    and associates and families to keep them from having a help
    line to reach out for. They use financial resources and lack
    that the victims have. They threaten that ``I am the only
    breadwinner.'' I understand all these unique situations, which
    many people in America just quite frankly don't understand, and
    it is an education process that commanders at all levels need
    to understand.
        From ongoing counseling to financial insecurity, it is
    imperative that the family receive the support they need after
    the criminal case has concluded, not just during but after. No
    matter how many resources we provide survivors, however, our
    primary goal should be to prevent domestic violence to begin
    with.
        I am encouraged that the Department has a new prevention
    plan of action, which is a comprehensive approach to
    prevention, including a focus on awareness and early
    intervention. I am also encouraged that the domestic violence
    response program leverages the entire scope of community-based
    resources.
        I look forward to hearing from our witnesses who are
    survivors of domestic violence about their experiences and what
    can be done to improve the process from your point of view.
        I am also interested to hear from the other witnesses on
    the first panel, some of whom have partnered with the
    Department of Defense to ensure their comprehensive prevention
    and response programs benefit from civilian best practices.
        Finally, I look forward to hearing from the Department of
    Defense on the current program and any new initiatives that may
    improve the domestic abuse prevention and response program.
        Thank you, Madam Chairman, and I yield back.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Kelly.
        Each witness will have the opportunity to present his or
    her testimony, and each member will have an opportunity to
    question the witnesses for 5 minutes. We respectfully ask the
    witnesses to summarize their testimony in 5 minutes if at all
    possible. Some of your stories are riveting, and we will be
    somewhat lenient in that regard.
        Your written comments and statements will be made part of
    the hearing record. Ms. Kate Ranta, survivor and advocate; Ms.
    Leah Olszewski, survivor; Mrs. Rohini Hughes, survivor and
    advocate; Ms. Arlene Vassell, vice president of program
    prevention and social change, the National Resource Center on
    Domestic Violence; Mr. David S. Lee, director of prevention
    services, PreventConnect; Mr. Brian Clubb, coordinator,
    military, and veterans advocacy program, Battered Women's
    Justice Program.
        Thank you all for being here.
        Ms. Ranta, would you like to begin?

             STATEMENT OF KATE RANTA, SURVIVOR AND ADVOCATE

        Ms. Ranta. My name is Kate Ranta, and I am a survivor of
    domestic and gun violence. My former spouse, Thomas Maffei, was
    a major in the Air Force. In 2009, we were living in officer
    housing on Fort Belvoir. It was there that he began to show
    increasingly abusive behavior toward the children and me. He
    controlled every aspect of our lives.
        During this time, Thomas was also pushing to retire. We
    were moving to Florida when the retirement came through. But as
    the time approached to close on the house we bought there, he
    still wasn't retired. So he said that he would forge orders and
    give them to those responsible for arranging PCS [permanent
    change of station] moves. He said they wouldn't even question
    it, and he was right.
        We moved into our new home in early September 2010. Thomas'
    behavior became erratic. On January 2, 2011, he took it to
    another level. He picked a fight with me, then locked me out of
    our bedroom. I heard the sound of a gun chambering. Terrified,
    I dialed 911 and ran out of the house. Then I heard the garage
    door open and out he came holding our toddler, who was only
    two.
        He got into the car, and I jumped in with them. He raised
    his fist at me, his eyes were black, and he told me to get out
    of the expletive car or he would punch me in my expletive face.
    I jumped out, and he sped off around the corner.
        When I ran back to the house the police were there and so
    was Thomas. He was giving his military coins to the officers,
    telling them that he was a veteran--he wasn't; he was still
    Active Duty--and that he had survived a Humvee explosion in
    Iraq. He didn't. He had never deployed. To them, he was a hero,
    and I was the hysterical wife.
        The next day I got a temporary restraining order, a
    civilian one, and he was served. I called his commander at
    Andrews Air Force Base, Colonel Timothy Applegate, and told him
    about the domestic violence incident, about the restraining
    order, about his soldier not being in Virginia but in Florida,
    and about the fake moving orders. He was quick to get me off
    the phone. He knew he was in trouble too. He had had no idea
    that Thomas wasn't even in Virginia for those past 4 months.
        Thomas also knew he had to get back to Virginia, which was
    what he did. In the meantime, I was connected with OSI [Air
    Force Office of Special Investigations] and reported the
    situation to them as well. As a result of that, Thomas was
    moved out from under Colonel Applegate and placed with a new
    commander, Lieutenant Colonel Michelle Ryan at Bolling Air
    Force Base, as OSI began its investigation. He was serving on
    Bolling with check-in time so they knew he had not left the
    base.
        During the months he was held at Bolling, Thomas went AWOL
    [absent without leave] two different times. Both times, I got
    calls from Lieutenant Colonel Ryan that he had not checked in
    as he was required to do, that they could not make contact with
    him, that my family and I should go somewhere where he couldn't
    find us, as she couldn't guarantee that he wasn't on his way to
    Florida. Both times they found him a day or two later, but she
    gave excuses about his whereabouts.
        OSI completed its investigation in mid-March. They were
    looking into spousal abuse as well as fraud. I was contacted by
    an investigator who let me know that they had found him guilty
    of both and would be recommending court-martial. I was
    relieved. That was until he told me that Thomas' punishment
    could actually be up to his command and that there was a chance
    that nothing would happen to him.
        Shortly after OSI closed the case, Lieutenant Colonel Ryan
    called me. She said that they had handled it administratively
    and that Thomas would be retired at the end of March. I
    literally begged her to reconsider. She said he had served 25
    years, and charging him would cause him to lose his pension.
    The military lifted the restraining order they put on him, and
    he was released out into society.
        A year and a half later, after months and months of
    civilian court hearings, Thomas showed up with a .9-millimeter
    Beretta, ambushed me at my apartment, and shot through the
    front door. My father and I were standing inside the door
    pushing against it trying to keep him out. My son, William, was
    standing just behind us.
        Thomas pushed his way in and shot some more. A bullet went
    through my right hand. He shot my dad point-blank in his left
    side, and I thought my dad had died. A bullet also went through
    my left breast just missing my heart. Another bullet went into
    my dad's left arm, leaving it paralyzed.
        Thomas did this in front of William, his own son, who was
    only 4, his own son who screamed, ``Don't do it, Daddy. Don't
    shoot Mommy.'' By some miracle, we all lived. The three of us
    got out of the apartment, and Thomas surrendered at the scene.
    He spent almost 5 years in jail before we had the civilian
    trial where he was found guilty of premeditated attempted
    first-degree murder and sentenced to 60 years in prison. So we
    saw justice on the civilian side, not the military side.
        All of this was avoidable. I hold his command fully
    responsible. They knew he was dangerous, but, instead, they
    chose not to do a thing about it. Domestic violence in the
    military is rampant. There are tons of Thomas Maffeis in their
    ranks. I hope this committee will be as appalled as I am about
    what happened to us and will take steps to change this ``take
    care of our own'' culture in the military at the expense of
    women and children whose lives are at stake.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Ranta can be found in the
    Appendix on page 43.]
        Ms. Speier. Thank you for that very compelling testimony.
        Ms. Olszewski.
        Ms. Olszewski. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Speier. Pronounce it for us so we----
        Ms. Olszewski. Olszewski.
        Ms. Speier. Olszewski.

           STATEMENT OF LEAH OLSZEWSKI, SURVIVOR AND ADVOCATE

        Ms. Olszewski. Good afternoon. My name is Leah Olszewski. I
    am a major in the Army National Guard, entrepreneur, daughter,
    sister, and one-time intimate partner of an Air Force Senior
    Master Sergeant Erik Cardin. Senior Master Sergeant Cardin
    misled me from day one.
        Initially under the impression he was still at Air Force
    Special Operations Command, I later learned he had been fired
    and kicked out of the unit 2 years earlier in 2014 for violence
    and abuse on service members, abuse that, according to several
    airmen, should have gotten him kicked out of the Air Force
    entirely.
        The Air Force then sent Senior Master Sergeant Cardin to
    Afghanistan for a year, where his commander told him if he did
    not stop his behavior, he was going to end up in jail. In 2016,
    Senior Master Sergeant Cardin was rewarded with a leadership
    role at Travis Air Force Base, California. One of his fellow
    noncommissioned officers warned Travis leaders of the senior
    master sergeant's history but was dismissed. They said they
    knew.
        Within 9 months of being at his Travis Air Force Base unit,
    Senior Master Sergeant Cardin was fired and kicked out again,
    this time for three significant acts of violence on service
    members. Once again, he was shuffled and made someone else's
    problem--no counseling, no court-martial, no consequences.
        A month after being fired, Senior Master Sergeant Cardin
    and I moved in together, and the severe abuse, emotional and
    physical, began. Over the next 6 months, I was a slut or a
    whore just like other women, should know my place as a woman.
    He isolated me, was jealous, enraged, and explosive. He
    constantly threatened me to break my neck and bust my teeth
    out.
        There were five physical assaults, including strangulation.
    Then, on October 11, 2017, my world came to an end when,
    preceded by 3 days of emotional abuse, he kicked me in the
    abdomen with both of his feet. Among other things, he knew I
    was pregnant. I called the police, and he ran from the house.
    Over the next 3 days, I miscarried.
        When command learned of the physical abuse, they simply
    said: Run away, Leah. He is doing you a favor.
        For the next 11 months and to this day, I have battled with
    the Air Force to do the right thing. Every entity on Travis Air
    Force Base, from command to family advocacy to security forces,
    failed me. They just waited on the senior master sergeant to
    retire.
        I asked for help from command at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-
    Lakehurst, Scott Air Force Base, and directly from former Air
    Force Secretary Wilson, General Goldfein, and Chief Master
    Sergeant of the Air Force Wright, with no response or a minimal
    entirely ineffective response.
        The Air Force Inspector General later dismissed several of
    my complaints. As they always had, the Air Force turned a blind
    eye, sometimes actually actively supporting Senior Master
    Sergeant Cardin instead of holding him accountable.
        On September 1, 2018, the Air Force honorably retired
    Senior Master Sergeant Cardin--no demotion, no court-martial,
    no consequences. Now he laughs in court about the miscarriage,
    abuse, and my suffering, and has continued to terrorize me by
    skipping over 48 other States and moving down the road from me
    knowing I was here.
        He had no friends, no job, no family, no clearance, no
    reason to be here. He violated his restraining order in April
    and is retaliating against me still by trying to ruin what is
    left of my Army career. I live in fear, heavily burdened every
    day.
        The Air Force is responsible for enabling and emboldening
    Senior Master Sergeant Cardin over many years, for putting
    service members and communities at risk, and for all of my
    losses. If they will do this to me, they will do this to
    everyone and anyone.
        If Air Force leaders won't even listen to its own members
    regarding Senior Master Sergeant Cardin, let alone me, and
    years of workplace and domestic violence equate to nothing in
    their eyes, how many others are there, and what does it take?
    What does it take?
        Thank you for your time.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Olszewski can be found in
    the Appendix on page 53.]
        Ms. Speier. Thank you so much, Ms. Olszewski.
        Mrs. Hughes.

           STATEMENT OF ROHINI HUGHES, SURVIVOR AND ADVOCATE

        Mrs. Hughes. Honorable members of the Armed Services
    Subcommittee, staff, respected experts, and witnesses present
    here today, as a former citizen of New Delhi, India, and now a
    U.S. citizen, I am a proud military Air Force spouse, a former
    spouse. I humbly and thankfully submit my testimony while being
    grateful to you for this opportunity to share my story on
    behalf of countless military families, my family, and my son
    Jay Hughes, who is with me here today.
        I am a patriotic military spouse who served as a Key Spouse
    program manager for various Air Force units, and I have been a
    proud stay-at-home mother for the last 20 years while serving
    our military, our community, and my family.
        My former husband, Major Matthew ``Matt'' Ernest Hughes is
    a prior Navy reservist, a former Active Duty U.S. Air Force JAG
    Corps officer, an AFLOA [Air Force Legal Operations Agency], at
    Joint Base Andrews, and currently has a private practice in
    Rockville, Maryland, while still serving as an Active reservist
    at an unknown location. Major Hughes has had four tours of
    deployment.
        On December 24, 2014, our world shook and was changed
    forever when my husband wiped out all our accounts, canceled
    our credit cards, and made stop payments on all outstanding
    checks. He followed these actions with an email to me stating
    erratic and controlling demands with a timeline attached for
    each demand.
        These demands clearly defined us as slaves to be
    objectified and owned, not to be loved, not to be respected,
    and not to be honored. Examples of Major Hughes' behavior was
    repeatedly laughing while degrading, tormenting, enjoying his
    cruelty towards us. Major Hughes would twist our son's nipples
    while laughing, forcing his thumbs inside an open, bleeding
    wound on Jay's shaking knee, laughing and stating that it
    didn't hurt him. He did this repeatedly.
        He neglected our unsupervised son while being intoxicated
    for several hours, which traumatized Jay, who believed his
    father was dead. On other abusive occasions, Jay would lock
    himself in a bathroom in fear for his life. Another instance
    Major Hughes dumped a large box of food on top of our sickly
    daughter's feverish body.
        After years of abuse, we sought medical and mental health
    assistance. When he discovered this, he made us feel guilty and
    prohibited us from going to hospitals and doctors, even after
    our daughter's failed attempt of suicide. Then he demanded I
    pay rent for continued shelter in our home or accept his offer
    of $200 per month for sex in exchange for shelter while he
    collected BAH [basic allowance for housing].
        We were forced to perform all of the household duties while
    he leisurely worked on his body. He would continuously yell in
    our faces calling us losers and dumb and lazy, even when I
    miscarried or was giving birth to our children.
        On December 31, 2014, I contacted Mr. Peter Katson at the
    Pentagon's legal assistance office, who encouraged me to
    contact the AFLOA commander, Colonel Thomas Zimmerman. My
    husband was reported to Child Protective Services in December
    2014 for child neglect and abuse by our counselor, formerly at
    Meier Clinics, Fairfax, Virginia.
        He has been reported again since 2015 by Walter Reed
    National Military Medical Clinic, Joint Base Andrews Family
    Advocacy Program, and Fort Belvoir Adolescent Inpatient Unit,
    and yet I am being falsely accused of parental alienation.
        In March 2015, Major Pamela Blueford, at the Joint Base
    Andrews' Family Advocacy Program, FAP, began reviewing the
    complaints submitted by Dr. Comilang at Walter Reed and began
    treating me with hostility during an interrogation in front of
    Ms. Mary Young, the victim advocate at FAP present at that
    time.
        She questioned my intentions and motives for seeking mental
    health assistance while repeatedly telling me these types of
    allegations could negatively affect my husband's career in the
    Air Force. Major Hughes' deputy in AFLOA told me my marriage
    would likely be headed towards divorce while stating that this
    was a civil matter, disregarding the reported evidence of
    abuse.
        Additionally, she stated that as long as my husband was
    paying rent, even though we chose not to return to the home due
    to our fears of our safety, he was providing adequate support
    and would not be mandated to provide any money to us for food
    or lodging while we continued to be homeless.
        In July 2015, Major Hughes separated from Active Duty in
    the Air Force to go to the Reserves. He utilized his separation
    orders to terminate our lease prematurely under the provisions
    of the Servicemember's Civil Relief Act, forcing my family into
    homelessness for almost 2 years.
        There were many other documented events of abuse, none of
    which supposedly met the Joint Base Andrews FAP abuse criteria.
    However, it did meet DOD's abuse criteria by 100 percent. After
    each abusive episode, Major Hughes would drink, deny his
    abusive actions and behavior, words and events, grin, and
    laugh. This forced us to begin documenting series of abusive
    events. We learned new terms, such as narcissism, sociopath,
    gaslighting, and coercive control, and parental alienation,
    from our therapists concerning Major Hughes.
        After several months of being ignored by my husband's
    command, AFLOA, interrogated and treated unprofessionally by
    FAP, Major Pamela Blueford continued to deny me the written
    documentation of the finding. I was informed by Ms. Mary Young
    at Joint Base Andrews FAP that this unprofessional behavior and
    aggression was a normal occurrence in the FAP office towards
    victims all the time.
        I am sorry. May I just grab some water?
        Ms. Speier. Sure. And then would you be able to sum up?
        Mrs. Hughes. Yes, ma'am.
        This former JAG has also utilized his position in
    exploiting the Servicemember's Civil Relief Act in civil court
    in front of a former JAG judge, forcing me to pay almost
    $30,000 in legal fees, which I cannot afford.
        This is a black eye on our U.S. military. It is the
    invisible scars that forever haunt me and my children through
    the failed suicide attempt from my daughter and my son's
    suicidal ideations. Major Hughes prohibits him from seeking
    medical attention. I fear losing my son to suicide while he
    eliminates all his assistance that he desperately needs. It is
    through our faith in Christ that we are able to sustain and be
    here in front of you today.
        Unfortunately, my story is not an isolated set of events or
    incidents. Many military spouses experience similar abuse,
    desertion, abandonment but are afraid to come forward because
    they are groomed not to expose their abuse while they are being
    silenced.
        Thank you for this opportunity today.
        [The prepared statement of Mrs. Hughes can be found in the
    Appendix on page 67.]
        Ms. Speier. Thank you very much, Mrs. Hughes.
        Ms. Vassell.

       STATEMENT OF ARLENE VASSELL, VICE PRESIDENT OF PROGRAMS,
      PREVENTION, AND SOCIAL CHANGE, NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER ON
                           DOMESTIC VIOLENCE

        Ms. Vassell. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Speier, Ranking
    Member Kelly, and distinguished members of the committee. Thank
    you for the opportunity to provide testimony on the importance
    of prevention. I thank the committee for holding this hearing
    to discuss lifesaving prevention practices and strategies.
        As mentioned before, I am the vice president of programs,
    prevention, and social change at the Natural Resource Center on
    Domestic Violence [NRCDV], with over 20 years of experience
    responding to the needs of survivors across the Nation. Our
    mission at the National Resource Center is to strengthen and
    transform efforts to end domestic violence. Since its inception
    in 1993, NRCDV has played a key role in providing collaborative
    learning and resource development to end and prevent domestic
    violence.
        The purpose of my testimony is to share strategies for
    prevention that could be implemented by the military. These
    strategies can help prevent domestic violence before it
    happens, benefiting not only military families but all our
    communities across the country. The prevalence data has been
    shared, but what I do want to emphasize is domestic violence
    causes profound and enduring health, economic, and other
    consequences across the lifespan. So it doesn't stop.
        Additionally, studies focusing on children exposed to
    violence finds that one in five children witnessing parental
    assault also leads to increased risk of experiencing and/or
    perpetrating domestic violence as adults. I also want to
    emphasize that children are resilient--it is not a cliche--and
    can bounce back with the appropriate age development and
    culturally specific interventions.
        Prevention is much more than education, and it goes beyond
    the individual. We must use a public health approach to prevent
    first-time victimization and perpetration from happening.
    Violence can be prevented and its impact reduced in the same
    way that public health efforts have prevented and reduced
    pregnancy-related complications, workplace injuries, infectious
    diseases, and illnesses resulting from contaminated food and
    water in many parts of the world.
        Sexual violence and domestic violence are more complicated
    than other public health issues because of the intentionality
    of harm and the social stigmas associated with their
    occurrence. Primary prevention efforts though impact modifiable
    factors associated with domestic violence, such as reducing
    acceptance of violence, challenging social norms, practices,
    and policies that support or reinforce gender-based violence.
        When violence occurs, there is a sense of urgency to
    intervene and support victims, hold abusers accountable. We
    know these things are necessary, but to stop violence before it
    ever happens, it is vital that we recognize that the
    connections among issues of health, safety, economic security,
    and other factors affecting well-being can increase public
    understanding of the complexity of the violence. This
    understanding, according to the CDC, the Centers for Disease
    Control and Prevention, will help inform primary prevention
    efforts.
        Our approach at the National Resource Center on Domestic
    Violence is awareness plus action equals social change. We have
    seen success in using this formula and many organizations and
    communities have adapted this approach. Awareness, increased
    knowledge, action, we develop and disseminate resources and
    tools to proactively prevent first-time victimization and
    perpetration by interrupting the cultural rules, norms, and
    constructs that it supports.
        Based on evidence, my expertise, and experience
    collaborating with various military communities throughout my
    career, my recommendations for the military are as follows,
    some already mentioned: develop and implement a comprehensive
    domestic violence response and prevention plan; create and
    foster a culture of equity, dignity, and respect, promoting
    health and safety; create policies and practices that support
    survivors, always believe survivors, and hold abusers
    accountable so that all service members know that domestic
    violence is not acceptable and will not be tolerated; develop
    and maintain collaborative relationships with community-based
    practitioners, social justice organizations, local domestic
    violence agencies, and State coalitions. Collaboration is key
    in ending and preventing domestic violence. No single agency
    can do this alone.
        Equip service members, all levels, with tools to recognize
    warning signs and encourage safe and effective bystander
    interventions to reduce or prevent violence and assault.
        As we continue to enhance responses and offer survivors and
    their families services that are survivor-centered and trauma-
    informed and lifesaving, we must continue to hold abusers
    accountable while also creating an accessible pathway for
    healing.
        And, most importantly, we must commit resources to
    addressing the root causes of violence and prevent perpetration
    and victimization from ever happening in the first place. As
    mentioned before, effective prevention programs require cross-
    discipline and multisector collaborations.
        Thank you for your support and interest in prevention
    efforts, strategies, and evidence-based practices. Preventing
    violence means changing our society and its institutions,
    eliminating attitudes, beliefs, behaviors, environments, and
    policies that contribute to violence and promoting those that
    create thriving communities for individuals to live, play,
    work, and worship.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Vassell can be found in the
    Appendix on page 81.]
        Ms. Speier. Thank you, Ms. Vassell.
        Mr. Lee.

      STATEMENT OF DAVID S. LEE, DIRECTOR OF PREVENTION SERVICES,
                             PREVENTCONNECT

        Mr. Lee. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Speier, Ranking Member
    Kelly, and members of the committee.
        I also want to thank the survivor panelists for their
    courage to speak and really highlight the importance of the
    need of changing the culture in our society, changing the
    culture in our armed services so we no longer accept domestic
    violence and make those changes that can create a place where
    people can live their lives to their full potential.
        I am the director of prevention at PreventConnect, a
    national resource center dedicated to advancing the prevention
    of domestic violence and sexual assault. Through my experience,
    we have been able to see many ways that prevention does work
    and can be able to make a difference.
        I am pleased today that we are addressing both survivor
    perspectives and prevention strategies for our Nation's armed
    services. It is necessary to be informed by survivor
    experiences to be able to define how we are going to go ahead
    in being able to create the changes we need to do.
        It is essential to respond to the needs of survivors in a
    trauma-informed manner, to assert the dignity of all people,
    and to hold those who have committed abuse accountable.
    However, those responses after violence has occurred are not
    sufficient to prevent such forms of violence from happening in
    the first place, nor are they sufficient to prevent them from
    happening in the future.
        Only with an intentional investment in prevention will you
    be able to change the culture that creates the condition which
    allows domestic violence and other forms of violence to
    continue. Prevention requires much more than awareness.
    Prevention is about creating a culture that challenges violence
    and the behaviors and the attitudes which contribute to it.
        We can learn from several other efforts that have been
    taking place. In the Department of Defense's 2018 Annual Report
    on Sexual Assault in the Military, the report noted that
    historically activities aimed at preventing sexual assault have
    primarily centered on raising awareness about the crime. These
    approaches have likely contributed to increases in victim
    reporting and use of support services, but civilian-sector
    research suggests that awareness programming does not translate
    in the kinds of long-term behavior change required to prevent
    sexual violence in the organizational level. This is also true
    for domestic violence.
        In order to do this, we must invest in prevention in the
    armed services to build a prevention infrastructure. There are
    many elements this should include. We need to have committed
    leadership for not just addressing domestic violence but its
    prevention, a commitment to be able to look at creating that
    change of culture that is going to name the problem and take
    action and be willing to be able to prevent it.
        It is going to require staff who receive good training in
    prevention, in understanding the issue, and having staff that
    are dedicated to prevention beyond just responding to the needs
    of those who have experienced domestic violence. It is going to
    require collaborative and engaging partnerships with other
    prevention efforts. We have to look at issues of domestic
    violence as we are also looking at sexual assault, sexual
    harassment, and other mental health issues.
        And it requires collaboration with local, State, and
    national civilian domestic violence prevention efforts to build
    cohesive prevention messages and programs that are going to
    work off each other and build off each other.
        There are many prevention strategies that can be able to
    make a difference or have an impact that we can see, and we
    have been dedicating our work and seeing the work that is
    taking place. Not much has been taking place within the
    military itself, but we have worked with families, workplaces,
    schools, and colleges, and sport, where we are seeing the
    beginnings of the potential for change.
        And there is several opportunities. Part of it, for
    example, in the Blue Shield of California's 2019 report ``A
    Life Course Framework for Preventing Domestic Violence,'' they
    talk about we have to mitigate and reduce childhood exposure to
    domestic violence by investing in prevention approaches aimed
    at improving the outcomes for parents and their children.
        In the Centers for Disease Control's 2017 publication
    ``Preventing Intimate Partner Violence Across the Lifespan: A
    Technical Package of Programs, Policies, and Practices''
    highlights strategies that can be able to prevent domestic
    violence. This involves engaging influential adults and peers,
    in particular, doing work with engaging men to be able to re-
    examine masculinity so we can create a new form of manhood that
    is dedicated towards promoting gender equity, not male
    dominance.
        For the armed services, we should look at the lessons
    learned in sports and fraternities, for example, where we have
    been able to make changes. We need to create protective
    environments and that the armed services can take efforts
    informed by school-based and workplace initiatives to make
    shifts in their culture to enhance safety, promote healthy
    relationships and respectful boundaries. And we can strengthen
    economic supports for families. Efforts that strengthen the
    household financial security and work supports are part of a
    comprehensive way to be able to prevent domestic violence.
        Domestic violence shatters lives and families and adversely
    affects the capacity of the armed services. With an investment
    in prevention, we can make a difference in the lives of service
    members, their families, and the community. As we continue this
    journey towards prevention, we build healthy relationships,
    healthy families, and healthy communities.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Lee can be found in the
    Appendix on page 95.]
        Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Lee.
        Mr. Clubb.

     STATEMENT OF BRIAN CLUBB, COORDINATOR, MILITARY AND VETERANS
           ADVOCACY PROGRAM, BATTERED WOMEN'S JUSTICE PROGRAM

        Mr. Clubb. I would like to thank you, Chairwoman Speier,
    Ranking Member Kelly, and the members of this committee for the
    opportunity to speak on this important topic. I am the
    coordinator of the Military and Veterans Advocacy Program for
    the Battered Women's Justice Project. I am also an attorney and
    a retired Marine officer.
        My program is funded by a grant from the U.S. Department of
    Justice Office on Violence Against Women. And through our work
    in the field, there are a number of issues we have identified
    that straddle the prevention of and response to domestic
    violence in the military and impact safety. And in the interest
    of time, I would like to summarize a number of issues that I
    have identified in my prepared testimony.
        The Armed Forces Domestic Security Act requires that
    civilian protection orders, or CPOs, be given the same force
    and effect on military installations as they have in the
    jurisdiction in which they are issued. However, it is difficult
    to enforce a CPO if key personnel on the military installation
    do not know of its existence.
        Registration procedures for CPOs can ensure that
    installation commanders and military law enforcement know about
    them, and that knowledge is crucial to enforcement. But despite
    the fact that the DOD policy permits such procedures, my
    experience is that it is rare the installations have them.
        Commanding officers also have the authority to issue
    military protection orders, or MPOs, to any service member
    under the command and have wide discretion as whether or not to
    do so. Commanding officers sometimes issue only verbal orders
    that do not provide protected parties with a written copy nor
    placement in the service member's record book, which are both
    required under DOD policy for written MPOs.
        In addition, this policy avoids the DOD requirement to
    submit MPOs to the National Criminal Information Center. This
    requirement was instituted in response to Federal law which
    mandates that commanding officers notify appropriate civilian
    authorities when any party to an MPO does not live on a
    military installation.
        Unfortunately, the recent DOD IG [Inspector General] report
    did not look at this particular issue, let alone the service's
    compliance with the actual Federal law and what it directs the
    military to do.
        Another concern about MPOs is expiration dates. Federal law
    states the MPOs shall remain in effect, quote, until such time
    as a military commander terminates the order or issues a
    replacement order, unquote.
        Several years ago the Department of Defense began a process
    to revise the standard MPO form. However, that process has
    stalled. In an interim, DOD has not issued any guidance
    regarding the issue of expiration dates. Arguably, as a result,
    commanding officers violate Federal law every time they sign an
    MPO with an expiration date.
        There is also the issue of firearms. Much research exists
    on the use of firearms in domestic violence homicides, and
    firearms are the most common manner of death in civilian as
    well as military domestic homicides. Federal law and many State
    laws restrict the possession of firearms by those that are
    subject to CPOs.
        However, we have no data as to how or if the military is
    enforcing personal firearms restrictions against service
    members or against civilians who are on military property and
    subject to those orders or whether commanding officers include
    firearms restrictions when they issue military protection
    orders.
        One issue that is not in my prepared testimony that I think
    has been raised by the testimony of the survivors here today is
    deferential treatment to senior service members. I oftentimes
    hear from individuals, to include some of the members on this
    panel today, in which it appears as if commanding officers and
    the whole military response is much more deferential to
    individuals of senior rank as well as those individuals who are
    coming close to retirement.
        The last issue I would like to address is collaboration
    between military installations and the local communities in
    which they are located. Collaboration is crucial as military-
    related victims and their abusers are often navigating two
    different and sometimes conflicting systems. These two systems
    must actively work together, effectively share information, and
    evaluate their processes in order to ensure that negative
    consequences don't occur and to increase safety for victims and
    others.
        DOD policy does direct collaboration between military
    officials and civilian counterparts. But beyond military FAP
    programs and their civilian counterparts, my experience is that
    the levels of collaboration between military installations and
    local communities as a whole is, at best, spotty. Collaboration
    takes a willingness of all parties, and DOD policy by itself
    cannot enforce those in civilian communities to do so.
        Our organization previously partnered with the National
    Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence and DOD on a multiyear
    project to create a Military-Civilian Coordinated Community
    Response Model. That work identified the difficulties in
    establishing and maintaining military civilian collaboration,
    to include jurisdictional issues, different reporting systems,
    confidentiality, and, of course, cost.
        I look forward to answering any questions that you or the
    committee members may have. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Clubb can be found in the
    Appendix on page 109.]
        Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Clubb.
        Thank you all for your outstanding testimony and to the
    survivors. Such extraordinary courage and such painful memories
    that you had to live through once again, but in so doing you
    have provided us with a great deal of understanding of how
    ubiquitous this issue is. And, as Mr. Clubb said, for those who
    are senior service members or are near retirement, you are
    poster survivors of what happens under those circumstances.
        Let me just start, Mr. Clubb, you referenced the use of
    firearms. If someone in civilian life now has been convicted of
    domestic violence, or even if they have been charged but not
    convicted, there is a means by which you can take their
    firearms away for a period of time, red flag laws being one of
    the examples.
        Does it not have a negative impact on the service member if
    they can't use a firearm in the course of their duties and,
    therefore, makes the commander less likely to want to impose an
    MPO?
        Mr. Clubb. Chairwoman, there are two specific Federal
    domestic violence statutes or substatutes within the Federal
    Gun Control Act. There is the Lautenberg Amendment, which
    requires--provides a prohibition for ammunition and firearms
    for anyone who is convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic
    violence.
        There is also a provision which restricts both possession
    and ownership of firearms and ammunition if an individual is
    subject to a qualifying court order specifically in which there
    is a domestic relationship, intimate partners, due process, et
    cetera.
        The Lautenberg Amendment does prohibit individuals,
    lifetime. There is no exemption for that. So, if an individual
    is convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence and
    they serve in the military, they eventually will be processed
    out because of their inability to carry a firearm.
        The qualifying court order prohibition does not have that
    same response and--or it does not require through DOD policy
    any sort of eventual discharge for that reason. There is also
    the official use exemption that allows government employees, to
    include military service members, who have to carry a firearm
    for the performance of their duties in order to do that and not
    violate Federal law.
        It has not been my personal experience that--and most of
    that is hearing from victims and survivors and from attorneys
    and advocates that are working on these issues directly--direct
    cases in which there is a--commanding officers not wanting to
    issue military protection orders for that reason. But at the
    same time, I think there is a lack of knowledge among
    commanding officers in general.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you.
        To each of you extraordinary women, if you had one thing
    that you would like to have seen changed in your set of
    circumstances that would have improved your ability to deal
    with the trauma of domestic violence or one thing as you look
    to speaking out on behalf of domestic violence victims who come
    after you, what would that be?
        Ms. Ranta. Well, for myself and my family, I think the
    pivotal moment was when OSI closed the case, and I was told
    that it would be up to his command whether to do anything about
    it or not. I was naive. I am not from a military family. I had
    no idea how to navigate this system, and it made no sense to
    me.
        But as I said at the end of my statement, I do hold his
    command fully accountable for the eventual outcome because I
    had done everything right. I had reported. I had gotten the
    protection order. I, you know----
        Ms. Speier. And OSI had recommended to commanding----
        Ms. Ranta. Right. And OSI had recommended a court-martial
    for him, and I do believe that, had he been held accountable
    and had the military taken care of things on their end, you
    know, the lethality that eventually happened on our end--almost
    death--could have absolutely been avoided.
        So just the idea that, okay, well, he served 25 years and
    his pension would be affected to me was, like, outrageous, and
    he should have absolutely been held accountable. Being found
    guilty of fraud and spousal abuse and court-martial
    recommendation should have absolutely happened, and I really do
    believe that we may have avoided near death.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you.
        Ms. Olszewski. Likewise, on the command issue specifically,
    because going back many years command failed to do anything
    with him previously. I think my goal is still to have him
    court-martialed, which can be done, from what I understand,
    without bringing him back to Active Duty. And, again, that goes
    back to the failure to court-martial him years ago really stems
    from command more than anything.
        Now, I had multiple issues with security force
    investigators never investigating, OSI not knowing for, you
    know, 7 or more months, just a wide variety of failures. But in
    the end, it was command going back many years that failed to do
    something that could have prevented me from ever meeting him
    potentially or could have mitigated or completely prevented his
    abuse of me.
        Ms. Speier. Mrs. Hughes.
        Mrs. Hughes. I would have to agree with my other
    colleagues. In addition to the command definitely being held
    responsible, the failure of their role in stepping forward and
    recognizing the reported abuse, the evidence of abuse, in
    addition to FAP's failure in stepping forward and implementing
    and executing the DOD's abuse criteria.
        I don't believe that that was done in my case, and that
    seems to be the main common thread among many other military
    spouses who are groomed to, first of all, not bring the abuse
    forward because this fear is instilled in us, and we are
    groomed to believe that it will destroy the service member's
    career.
        But then, when we do come forward, it is completely
    screened out by concluding that it didn't meet the abuse
    criteria, shutting down each and every resource that we could
    possibly obtain in seeking justice or protection for ourselves.
        Thank you, ma'am.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you.
        Mr. Kelly, 5 minutes.
        Mr. Kelly. Thank you, Chairwoman, again.
        And first of all, you know, I want to talk--we talked about
    strangulation. And when I was a district attorney [DA] in
    Mississippi, I was very helpful in trying to get the law
    changed so that it became a felony in Mississippi because that
    is one of the most controlling behaviors that a domestic abuser
    can have, is strangulation.
        And so I guess my question to you guys--if you know the
    answer. If not, I hope DOD is listening. I will ask it later--
    is strangulation a felony domestic violence in the military?
        Mr. Clubb. Congressman, I know that, with the addition of
    UCMJ article--I believe it is 128(b)--that establishes domestic
    violence assault, I believe that strangulation is included in
    that. But, of course, it depends on how it is prosecuted in the
    military. Clearly, if it is non-judicial punishment, that is
    not a conviction and----
        Mr. Kelly. Thank you. I want to get to some more. But
    number one is we have got to make sure strangulation at least
    has the ability to be prosecuted as a felony.
        And second, I want to give--my wife is a victim assistance
    coordinator back home for the DA's office, and so we are very
    involved and engaged in this. And one of the things that
    Mississippi also passed a law on while I was district attorney
    that--is, if you are charged with domestic violence,
    misdemeanor or felony, you are not allowed to plead that down
    to some other violation that does not include domestic
    violence. So you can't plead to something that is not domestic
    violence so that the Lautenberg Amendment does kick in. Because
    it is very important that when someone has committed a domestic
    violence act and they have been convicted of that, that they
    lose their ability to carry a firearm and then--and part of the
    problem is, quite frankly, ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
    Firearms and Explosives] would not prosecute or do anything
    with those things when reported when I was a prosecutor. ATF
    would not come take the guns away when I would call them and
    say, ``This guy is a convicted domestic violence guy that has a
    firearm,'' and they would not come take it.
        And we have got to enforce the laws that we have. Rather
    than looking for new laws, let's enforce the laws that we have
    also. Because I think that is helpful to enforce Lautenberg to
    not be able to carry a firearm forever once you are convicted
    of a felony or of domestic violence.
        How helpful would it have been to you survivors had the
    military--when you talk about pensions for senior--if they
    would have said, if convicted of domestic violence, whatever
    degree of pension you have earned to this point as a senior
    service member goes to your spouse and children to take care of
    them, but you don't get it. How helpful would that have been to
    you three?
        Ms. Ranta. Yeah, so extremely helpful. So, like I said, I
    am not--I don't know really the ins and outs of the military. I
    was only married to him for 3 years. My understanding was that,
    as the spouse, I was not really entitled to any of his pension
    because we had to be married for 10 years. But we did have--we
    do have a child together, and, you know, my child hasn't seen a
    dime of his precious pension that they so wanted him to keep.
    So, yeah, it would have been extremely helpful if that had been
    an option.
        Mr. Kelly. Because that financial instability or the
    ability to pay your bills and take care of and have a place to
    live--I heard your story--to have a place to live--that he has
    to look for a place, not you. He has to look for a place, not
    your kids. He has to look for a place to live.
        And those are--so we need to make sure that we are
    educating folks so they know that, if someone leaves, it is not
    the victim; it is the abuser who has to leave. And now if they
    are found innocent and those things, then that is a whole
    different ball game.
        But until that point, once the accusation is made, we need
    to take care of our victims and make sure that they have a
    place to live, that they [have] healthcare, and that their pay
    continues, whether that be through whatever. With those type of
    policies, that DOD helps you as a victim until resolved in
    finality, and then also not being able to plead down to
    something less than domestic violence, would that be helpful?
        Ms. Olszewski. So I know for me, sir, it is a little bit
    different, but luckily there is the California Victims
    Compensation Program, which I have been able to get some
    assistance from. So, for me, it is a little different,
    obviously, but I did incur--I went into huge debt leaving out
    of California and things of that nature.
        I don't know that I am actually really eligible for
    anything, but--so, for me, it doesn't really apply so, I just
    wanted to----
        Mr. Kelly. And then the final thing, and I guess I just got
    time for a comment, but I want to make sure that we understand
    how to get either civilian protection orders and military
    protection orders. There needs to be a policy of who in the
    chain of command gets those and to be a validation that they
    have to be and they are required by the violator to turn those
    over to the chain of command, which becomes a crime if they
    don't do so.
        And, with that, I yield back, Chairwoman.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Kelly.
        To your point, 70 percent of our service members live off
    base. So the likelihood of a CPO being identified by the
    perpetrator and reporting it to the command is somewhat, I
    think, challenging. It seems like we need to put something in
    place where there is a sharing of that data between the two,
    the civilian and the military.
        Mr. Clubb. Chairwoman, there is a DOD policy that requires
    service members to reveal or tell their command when they are
    not eligible, but whether or not, especially younger service
    members, really understand that if they have a protection order
    against them is debatable.
        Ms. Speier. Right. Right.
        Mrs. Davis for 5 minutes.
        Mrs. Davis. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        Thank you all. I really appreciate your testimony.
        I wanted to just start with Ms. Vassell for a second,
    because you listed a number of best practices, resources. And
    as I am sitting here listening to those, I am wondering whether
    our survivors are sort of thinking about those too and then
    feeling so frustrated because none of those things seem to be
    there for them.
        And so where is the connection? You know, we often talk
    about best practices. We want to change the culture. We want
    people to be able to go for help when they need it and maybe
    even if they are not sure they need it, but they have a sense
    that something is wrong in their situation.
        And I know it was mentioned that, you know, we need to
    connect some of the training, the culture. And yet we are
    talking about this, and it has been a long time that we have
    been talking about this, and that is my frustration. So the
    question that the chairwoman asked about pointing to one thing
    that would have made a difference, could you point to a
    systemic problem that we could fix that would prevent this from
    happening to anyone else? Do you feel you answered that
    question, or is there something else in this that is just
    amiss?
        Mrs. Hughes. Ma'am, I believe, as Mr. Kelly mentioned, we
    currently have excellent provisions in the legislation. We
    currently have an incredible DOD abuse criteria. I don't
    believe that it needs to be improved. I believe it needs to be
    executed. I think there is a major impediment in gaps that we
    need to recognize today, that, unfortunately, the commanders,
    either through the lack of knowledge or the lack of desire or
    the lack of--I say this respectfully--their arrogance, they are
    not executing what Congress and the military has already put in
    place.
        So, even though I appreciate the best practices from my
    colleague, I think it is imperative that we look at the
    Servicemembers Civil Relief Act. It is an incredible Federal
    law placed and set to serve the military families, yet it is
    being exploited by the service members. So what can we do to
    tighten it?
        So I don't believe that new practices are going to be
    necessarily a negative; they would certainly help. But I think
    focusing on what we currently already have and executing it and
    holding individuals and commanders accountable is where the key
    is, because I think one common thread amongst all three of us
    is the commanders' failure to act and hold the service member
    responsible.
        Thank you, ma'am.
        Mrs. Davis. How would you communicate that? As a spouse, I
    know that one of the issues is the fear of somehow interrupting
    a spouse's career or a partner's career, whatever that may be,
    and somehow that being such a wholly negative and fearful thing
    to do. What would you change?
        Ms. Ranta. So I personally was not very afraid of the
    possibility of something happening to his career. I really felt
    like he needed to be held responsible. He had done this to me.
    He had done this to my children. I was in the right, in the
    sense that I had done the things that I was supposed to do, and
    he wasn't being held accountable.
        And I think the frustration comes with, as we have said,
    you know, going to the commander, nothing happening, but then
    where do you go from there? And not knowing how to navigate.
    And it is just incredibly frustrating and you feel very, very
    helpless. And it is just an entire cultural shift that has to
    happen. And other than speaking out and telling my story
    anywhere and everywhere, I don't know how to do that.
        Ms. Olszewski. If I could quickly touch on that. So, in my
    case, I was concerned about protecting him--that is often the
    case with domestic violence victims--but I also thought about
    my own career with the military and how to tell my commander,
    ``Hey, this is what is going on.'' And it all came down very,
    you know--it was just difficult for me. So I think domestic
    violence victims that are service members have their own set of
    issues on top of being a spouse.
        Mrs. Davis. Do we need better help lines for fear of--that
    is not--but being able to identify someone higher up? You don't
    feel that that is a resource either?
        Ms. Olszewski. Well, so I made phone calls. I relied on
    friends that were Air Force service members who cared about
    what I had been through to contact and get email addresses for
    the next chain of command, the next chain of command, the next
    chain of command, although they did nothing as well.
        So I think it is a good idea to know where you can go, but
    if different entities aren't really sharing that information
    because they have something to cover up or----
        Mrs. Davis. And you think had this been only in the
    civilian sector, where would you have gone in that case?
        Ms. Olszewski. Right. I am not sure. I never had--been a
    domestic violence victim, so I wouldn't say that I had clarity
    on that as well, but surely within the military, which they are
    supposed to have higher standards, I would have expected more.
        Mrs. Davis. Thank you. I know my time is up. Maybe we will
    come back.
        Mrs. Hughes. Ma'am, just, lastly, I would like to answer
    your question.
        Ms. Speier. Mrs. Hughes, we are going to come back to you.
        Mrs. Hughes. Thank you.
        Ms. Speier. Mr. Mitchell for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Mitchell. Thanks very much, Madam Chair.
        We owe spouses and children of service members a great deal
    of gratitude and attention for the sacrifice they go through
    while people serve. People like the individuals you described
    today, they are not effective service members either. Let's be
    honest about it. We do not want those people serving in our
    military.
        They are dangerous. They don't represent our military well.
    They don't represent our Nation well. So the idea that somehow
    we are protecting their career, they shouldn't have one. That
    is, in my opinion, something we need to address in terms of
    policy discussions with the Pentagon, if need be,
    legislatively. If you are a domestic violence perpetrator, you
    would do that to other people, and that is a violation of our
    morals. So I don't care about their career.
        Let me ask you a question. It seems to me there is a system
    in place, you went through the process, but it just flat out
    didn't work. Is that a correct assessment, ladies? Go ahead.
        Mrs. Hughes. Sir, just this is an answer in conjunction to
    answering Mrs. Davis'. When I contacted the federally regulated
    domestic violence hotline to discover and seek out any sort of
    resource that the military had failed to provide me, because
    they only referred me to calling 211 when we were going into
    homelessness, I was told that, as a DV [domestic violence]
    victim, I would be deferred back to the military installation's
    FAP for further assistance, which had already turned me down.
    It told me that they were not going to be able to do anything.
    The only thing that they offered for assistance was counseling,
    which I had already been receiving from Walter Reed, sir.
        Mr. Mitchell. Let me ask each of you, have you gotten any
    information that any of the commanding officers that you
    contacted through the process in any manner were held
    accountable or questioned about this at all by their senior
    commanding officers?
        Ms. Ranta. Yeah, I will answer for my case. Like I said, he
    was retired. To my knowledge, Colonel Applegate is retired and
    retired in 2013. Nothing ever happened to him. As far as I
    know, it got swept under the rug that he was made aware that
    Thomas Maffei was AWOL and not even living in Virginia and had
    gone to Florida. And then Lieutenant Colonel Michelle Ryan, my
    understanding is she works at the Pentagon, and I think she
    also retired too. Nothing ever happened.
        After we were shot, I sent his mugshot and media links to
    both of his commanders and sarcastically thanked them for, you
    know, protecting their soldier instead of the soldier's wife
    and children, as I had warned. And I received no response.
        Ms. Olszewski. If I could say also, I actually filed--so
    SECAF [Secretary of the Air Force] office, Lieutenant Colonel
    Tyler Lewis, told me in September 2018, after I found out they
    had honorably retired Senior Master Sergeant Cardin, that I
    would have to show all the failures of the Air Force before
    they would relook him.
        So I filed a Security Forces/OSI and a command complaint,
    which the command complaint alone was about 60 pages.
    Initially, the Air Force IG, staff IG had said that they were
    concerned for my safety and wanted me to file a complaint.
    Well, within 2 months of filing that command complaint, they
    basically dismissed it, and they said: This case is closed. We
    consider this case closed.
        And they would not look at any of the commanders who had
    failed years before during my time and thereafter, going all
    the way up to the SECAF office.
        Mr. Clubb. Congressman, many of the issues that these
    survivors have addressed I think goes back to commander
    discretion. And we understandably give military commanders a
    wide range of discretion on many issues. Regarding domestic
    violence, that discretion, in many cases, involves lack of
    prosecution, concern about ruining the service member's career,
    et cetera, some of the things that we have discussed today.
        Mr. Mitchell. Let me stop you a second, sir, and I
    appreciate that. You don't have discretion. They should not
    have discretion when it comes to abusing your spouse or your
    children. What the hell is that discretion?
        And I think, Madam Chair, we should have the ranking
    members from the Pentagon come over here and have a
    conversation of how they are holding their commanding officers
    accountable for failure to deal with this because there is a
    system there. We have money in the system. We have policies in
    place. But they don't want to damage someone's career. They
    don't want to damage their own career.
        They are damaging our military. They are damaging families.
    It is unacceptable. And if they don't like that criteria, we
    can find other officers that want to have an Army or armed
    services that is respected in the world and in our own Nation.
        But to abuse your spouse--and my time is up, I apologize--
    to abuse your spouse or children because you have a
    psychological issue or whatever other reason you may justify it
    is unacceptable in our military, is unacceptable in our
    society. But we are sure not going to tolerate it. So we need
    to have them come over here and explain to me what they are
    going to do to hold them accountable because it disgusts me.
        And I appreciate you all coming. Thank you.
        Ms. Speier. Mr. Mitchell, thank you for your comments. What
    has played out here is really abuse of command discretion. And
    in all of your cases, a determination was made that the service
    member should be protected over the family member and the
    children.
        So, much like we have done with sexual assault, we may want
    to take these cases up to a higher level so that you don't have
    that just inherent conflict of interest that exists because the
    commander knows the service member. If it goes up to another
    level, that might----
        Mr. Mitchell. Madam Chair, in my opinion, until we have
    that higher level command and we hold a commander accountable
    for their career for failing to manage their forces, we are
    never going to get there. I agree with you, and it needs to be
    something that, if you won't manage your own personnel, then
    you don't belong being a colonel or whatever other--and you go.
        As soon as someone is held--a few people are held
    accountable in the system--and you understand this, Mr. Kelly.
    As soon as some people are held accountable, then, in fact,
    they will take it seriously. And we need to insist that they
    are going to be, or we will simply find some other officers to
    lead our military. It is disgusting.
        Thank you for your deference.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you.
        In addition to holding some of the DOD officials
    accountable, I think what we also need to do is bring the
    inspector general in, because the inspector general for DOD has
    already identified a number of failings in each of the
    services, in terms of complying with DOD regulations on
    appropriately identifying, fingerprinting, handling these cases
    in a manner that is appropriate.
        Yes. Now to our colleague Mr. Cisneros, for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Cisneros. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
        Thank you all for sharing your story today.
        Mr. Clubb, I just kind of want to follow up on this, the
    same thing about the commanding officer discretion. And you had
    mentioned something earlier. But non-judicial punishment [NJP],
    how likely are the commanding officers, you know, going to deal
    with this through NJP rather than kind of actually reporting or
    trying to do it through a court-martial?
        Mr. Clubb. I have not seen duty statistics or service
    statistics on this the way you--the statistics that we have
    seen on sexual assault, for example, that may have been cited
    to this committee in the past.
        I think part of the reason for that is that, until just
    last year, there wasn't a domestic violence article in the
    UCMJ, and I believe there is difficulty in tracking. I have not
    served as a judge advocate in the Marine Corps, but it is my
    understanding, talking to those that are serving within the
    services, that there are ways of flagging cases as they go
    through the system even before there is a domestic violence
    article, identify who the victims are and identifying cases as
    falling under this criteria.
        But not seeing those statistics from which cases are going
    to court-martial, which cases are going to NJP or declining
    prosecution or any action, I can only speculate on that.
        Mr. Cisneros. Does the commanding officer have any
    responsibility? Like we said, 70 percent of, you know, military
    personnel are likely to live off base, so this domestic
    violence is likely to happen off base out of the commanding
    officer's jurisdiction, you know, with civilian authorities.
        When those individuals are brought to the command, what
    responsibility does a commanding officer have to take action on
    that?
        Mr. Clubb. Well, commanders can prosecute cases that happen
    off installation. And I think part of what I referenced earlier
    about military-civilian coordinated community response is the
    coordination, collaboration, sharing of information, and
    determining who is going to take cases in which either the
    civilian authorities could prosecute, military authorities, or
    potentially both, and deciding the best place to handle a case
    judiciously and effectively.
        Mr. Cisneros. Mrs. Hughes, I want to follow up on something
    you had said earlier too, right? You said, as a military
    spouse, you are kind of groomed, you know, not to come forward
    and not to report domestic violence, to not really say
    anything.
        And I think this is part of that culture that is I guess
    instilled in you, right, that we all agree that it needs to be
    changed, but who is this, you know, that is instilling this in
    you and says, ``No, don't come forward''? I mean, is it other
    spouses? Is it, you know, Air Force personnel? Is it Air Force
    service members? Who is really coming--who is this culture that
    is doing this, that is telling you not to say anything?
        Mrs. Hughes. Sir, thank you for asking that question,
    because I think it is a very pertinent question. I am the
    former Key Spouse for the Air Force in addition to the Key
    Spouse program manager. I worked very closely with the first
    sergeants and the commanders and the wing commanders, and I saw
    time and time again that as we collaborated in the Key Spouse
    program manager, the culture there seems to stem from the
    military personnel that are grooming these Key Spouses to
    ensure that the victims of domestic abuse do not come forward,
    do not share the information with the first sergeant or the
    commander, because it is going to ruin the career. And then the
    first sergeants are coming alongside the victim and reiterating
    that information, saying, that: Now, if you report this, let me
    remind you what the consequences will be. You are not going to
    get any BAH. You are not going to get any type of housing
    assistance either. You will be kicked off base.
        So these are the kind of fear tactics that are being
    instilled in the victims that are the military spouses and
    children as well. Thank you.
        Mr. Cisneros. And I think I have time for one last
    question, but, hopefully, I don't butcher it too bad, but Ms.
    Olszewski.
        Ms. Olszewski. Olszewski.
        Mr. Cisneros. Olszewski. Sorry.
        Ms. Olszewski. Good enough.
        Mr. Cisneros. So you weren't married to the master
    sergeant, correct? Right?
        Ms. Olszewski. No. We lived together. We had shared bank
    accounts, shared lease.
        Mr. Cisneros. So just one thing, and I know this is
    something that we have talked about a lot, you know, throughout
    Congress, and we talked about the boyfriend loophole, being
    that you weren't married. Did you ever come to a situation
    where they were saying that, ``Hey, well, you are not married,
    this isn't really domestic violence,'' and can you talk about
    that a little bit?
        Ms. Olszewski. Right. I think that was the thing, and that
    is why the commander said to me that day, ``Hey, just run away,
    Leah, he is doing you a favor,'' because he thought, ``Oh, this
    is so simple; they are just boyfriend-girlfriend living
    together.''
        So I did feel that the Air Force really looked at us solely
    as intimate partners. I guess, according to Family Advocacy,
    that is what we were. And then they feel, once an intimate
    partner, always an intimate partner. But, again, I didn't
    really get any benefit of being a service member, in terms of
    even special victims' counsel, which is primarily for sexual
    assault, which is great.
        But--so there were issues with that. It was really
    challenging. But now, of course, that he has filed, you know, a
    bogus IG complaint on me because I was an O-4, he is saying
    that I--now he has filed an IG complaint in the past few months
    saying conduct unbecoming of an officer because I am an O-4,
    and he was an E-8 at the time. So he had no problem back then.
    SOCOM [U.S. Special Operations Command] commander had no
    problem back then with any of this. And now it is being filed,
    and my rank is now being used against me to a degree. So, when
    it is convenient, we are just intimate partners and boyfriend-
    girlfriend; and when it is not, suddenly military service comes
    into play.
        Mr. Cisneros. My time is expired. Thank you very much.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Cisneros.
        I have one question before we go on to Ms. Escobar. The
    Family Assistance Program--the Family Advocacy Program, excuse
    me, is going to be testifying next. Each of you had
    interactions with the Family Advocacy Program. So, after you
    answer Ms. Escobar's question, I would like for you to think
    about what didn't work for you in the F-A-P, or FAP.
        Ms. Escobar for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Escobar. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
        And thank you for your continued focus on issues that need
    to be brought to light and that need transparency. And many
    thanks to our witnesses, especially for your courage and for
    your willingness to tell your story and to help us address an
    issue that very badly needs to be addressed and as best we can.
        Because of your experience, I am wondering if you could
    share--and this is open, actually, for all of you, any of you
    who would like to answer this question. Where have we failed
    you? Where are some specific instances where we could have and
    should have done better so that we can look to rectify this in
    the future so that, wherever it was that we failed you, we can
    try to fix it? And it is open to any of you, anyone who would
    like to go first.
        Ms. Olszewski. Okay. I will touch on it really quickly
    because I know everyone else has something to say too. So I
    kind of believe in what Mr. Mitchell had mentioned about
    bringing the leadership, calling them out. I believe that does
    matter because it seems like a lot of things that go on are
    from the top down, and, really, it needs to be from the bottom
    up. So something like the Air Force really needs to involve
    victims, in terms of changing things.
        So I don't think that a lot of, quote/unquote, leaders will
    do anything until they are actually called out, and I think
    that is a huge thing to start with that process and then purge
    them from the military system, as he mentioned.
        Ms. Escobar. Thank you.
        Ms. Ranta. Yeah. In my situation, I was basically frozen
    out. I had no resources. I had no way of knowing how to
    navigate, you know, what to do next. I was just fortunate that
    I had military wives that helped me, you know, point me in
    different directions on who to report to and what to do.
        I mean, I had no guidance at all from his commander. His
    commander just wanted, you know, to sweep it under the rug. So,
    I mean, they just wanted to make it go away, and that was a
    humongous failure.
        Mrs. Hughes. Ma'am, as far as I am concerned, I see it as a
    major command failure because I believe that the command can
    hold FAP responsible to upholding the DOD's abuse criteria,
    because the commander has an enormous amount of influence in
    these CRB [Central Registry Board] hearings that are taking
    place under the FAP umbrella, which, unfortunately, is failing
    the system.
        So I say this very humbly and respectfully. If we are going
    to put service members in command positions that are leadership
    positions, as Mr. Mitchell mentioned, can we please ensure that
    these individuals have the moral ground to uphold and lead such
    critical issues, such as sexual assault and domestic violence
    and domestic abuse. And if they don't or if they choose not to,
    then I humbly request this subcommittee to assign an oversight
    committee which oversees these commanders and holds them
    responsible. And that committee would be under your
    subcommittee that would work collaboratively with these
    commanders at each military installation.
        Thank you, ma'am.
        Ms. Escobar. Thank you.
        Ms. Vassell. And just hearing from the survivors today and
    throughout my career--and, again, thank you all so much for
    your ongoing courage--the best practices that I had mentioned
    earlier were more focused on prevention, right? Preventing the
    violence from even happening in the first place and creating a
    culture within the military installations with, like, zero
    tolerance, and it will not happen. Perpetration will not
    happen. Victimization will not happen.
        But hearing from the survivors and survivors that I have
    continuously heard from, what I would say is policies,
    practices, day-to-day practices need to match policies. Abusers
    need to be held accountable, regardless of their rank, like Mr.
    Mitchell had mentioned earlier. Responses to survivors, if we
    are going to talk about, you know, what happens after an
    incident occurs, should be survivor-centered, should be trauma-
    informed.
        The survivors that are sharing with us today, this should
    be an ongoing process. Whatever is being enforced or developed
    should be informed by survivors throughout the entire process,
    not after the fact to say, well, would this work? So I think
    engaging survivors throughout the process, listening to
    survivors about what works, what doesn't work, and with
    enhanced responses and prevention, collaboration with
    practitioners, with preventionists, with domestic violence
    programs, I think would be another best practice that I would
    talk about.
        I have coordinated projects that included installations and
    domestic violence agencies that resulted in a toolkit for
    installations and for civilians. So just talking about
    collaboration, collaboration. It sounds like it is not helpful,
    but it works, both for prevention and for intervention. So
    being survivor-centered, being trauma-informed, and hold
    perpetrators/abusers accountable.
        Ms. Escobar. Thank you.
        Unfortunately, my time has expired. Thank you.
        Ms. Speier. So the question on FAP, can you give us 30
    seconds of what FAP did or did not do for you?
        Ms. Ranta. I didn't even know about it. Actually, in your
    office today was the first time I had even heard of FAP. So
    that is a failure. Again, I had no navigation. I had no
    resources. I had no idea where to turn. So I can't even say
    that they failed me because I didn't even know about it. So,
    obviously, there is something--there is some link missing
    there. I am sure there are people that are like me.
        Ms. Speier. Ms. Olszewski.
        Ms. Olszewski. Yes. So I actually filed a Family Advocacy
    complaint with AMCIG [Air Mobility Command Inspector General],
    and they found five of six failures to have occurred. So I did
    not learn of FAP either through anybody other than my own
    efforts, through the VA [Department of Veterans Affairs],
    actually, on Travis Air Force Base. And Family Advocacy failed
    to include evidence. They ignored the strangulation,
    miscarriage, you name it. They never reported to the commanders
    or shared their information. That unrestricted aspect didn't
    even occur. So I find Family Advocacy to be kind of a--I don't
    want to say a joke, but it is bad.
        Ms. Speier. Mrs. Hughes.
        Mrs. Hughes. Ma'am, in my particular case, my cases of
    abuse in 2015 were never opened. I didn't discover this until I
    contacted someone at Lackland Air Force Base. And then,
    finally, the abuse cases were opened in 2019, only to come to
    the same conclusion, that it didn't meet the abuse criteria.
        To me, I am being told repeatedly that FAP is not an entity
    to adjudicate; it is just an entity to provide resources.
    However, I disagree. From my experience, that that is exactly
    what is taking place.
        Ms. Speier. They adjudicated and didn't provide services?
        Mrs. Hughes. That is correct, ma'am.
        Ms. Speier. Mr. Lee, you had said in your testimony that
    holding days of recollection or weeks of domestic violence
    awareness is, in part, what we tend to do as opposed to
    actually drill down and provide the prevention. I want to give
    you the last word for the panel.
        Mr. Lee. Right. So every October we declare Domestic
    Violence Awareness Month. And, indeed, many places will have a
    proclamation, and there will be an announcement that goes out.
        What we need to be able to do is it is about making that
    investment in prevention and being able to look at that 12
    months a year, about how leadership is going to be involved,
    about how we are going to not just educate but be able to
    change the structure and look at how we can use military
    culture to be able to say that this is not acceptable.
        When we see a culture that--and we heard so many stories of
    denial and not being able to--and not about accountability. The
    values of the military are about the values that are aligned
    with saying that we stand with each other to make sure that we
    are going to be stronger together and not a way that is going
    to be sacrificing people in the greater mission.
        So we need to find a way to use those messages. And there
    are prevention programs that we can do that I have described in
    my testimony that we can be able to do, that we have been doing
    in college campuses, that we have been doing with high schools,
    that we have been doing with sports, that we need to be able to
    start looking at how we can implement that in military
    settings, so we can be able to change that culture from the
    lowest rank to the highest officers to be able to make that
    change.
        Ms. Speier. Right. Thank you very much. You have been
    outstanding witnesses. We are now going to take a couple
    minutes' recess so we can reset for the next panel. Thank you
    again.
        [Recess.]
        Ms. Speier. Now we are moving on to our second panel. And I
    would like to welcome Mrs. A.T. Johnston, the Deputy Assistant
    Secretary of Defense for Military Community and Family Policy
    at the Department of Defense; and Mr. Kenneth Noyes, Associate
    Director for the DOD Family Advocacy Program, Department of
    Defense.
        Mrs. Johnston, I think you have a statement.

       STATEMENT OF A.T. JOHNSTON, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
    DEFENSE FOR MILITARY AND COMMUNITY AND FAMILY POLICY DEPARTMENT
     OF DEFENSE; AND KENNETH NOYES, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, DOD FAMILY
    ADVOCACY PROGRAM (MILITARY FAMILY READINESS POLICY), DEPARTMENT
                               OF DEFENSE

        Mrs. Johnston. Yes, ma'am. Thank you.
        On behalf of Mr. James Stewart and the cadre of dedicated
    and expert professionals in the Family Advocacy Program, thank
    you, Madam Chair, Ranking Member Kelly, and members of this
    distinguished subcommittee for your unfailing support of
    quality of life programs that keep our service members and
    their families strong and resilient.
        Ensuring the continued welfare and well-being of service
    members and their families is a responsibility the Department
    of Defense takes very seriously, as family readiness is
    imperative to readiness of the force. I appreciate the
    opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the
    Department's efforts in addressing the serious issue of
    domestic abuse within the military community.
        Joining me today is Mr. Ken Noyes, Associate Director from
    the Office of Military Family Readiness Policy, which is the
    policy proponent for the Family Advocacy Program.
        Before moving on, I would like to thank the witnesses on
    the first panel who shared their personal experiences. Each of
    you has taken a traumatic, heartbreaking event in your life and
    turned it into a call to action. We hear you, and we will
    continue to improve our programs and services. You and all
    other victims of domestic violence deserve nothing less.
        We consider our prevention and response actions to be
    comprehensive. However, we recognize that domestic abuse
    presents human factor challenges that require continual
    training, education, and improvement in the effectiveness and
    responsiveness of our system. We cannot do it alone. We must
    and we will continue to work with our community and Federal
    partners as well as with leading experts in academia.
        While we continue to make significant progress in our
    efforts to effectively address and prevent domestic abuse
    within the military community, the Department is acutely aware
    that there is still much work to be done. We remain committed
    to the safety and welfare of our service members and their
    families and can never forget that our families, unfortunately,
    are not immune from the serious national public health issue
    that is domestic abuse.
        We need and we welcome the continued interest and support
    of this committee and Congress in advancing this critical work.
    And, with that, we look forward to your questions.
        [The joint prepared statement of Mrs. Johnston and Mr.
    Noyes can be found in the Appendix on page 117.]
        Ms. Speier. Mr. Noyes, do you have any--do you have a
    statement?
        Mr. Noyes. No.
        Ms. Speier. You do not.
        I guess my first question, Mrs. Johnston, is, based on what
    you heard in the last panel, what steps are you going to take?
        Mrs. Johnston. First of all, all the testimony was
    absolutely heartbreaking, but what that does is that is a call
    to action to us. In these particular cases, I don't know the
    specifics, so, in that regard, I would have to refer them back
    to the services for action.
        Ms. Speier. Well, first of all, two of the people, two of
    the victims didn't even know that FAP exists. So wouldn't that
    suggest to you that you have a job to do in terms of making
    sure that all families know the services that are available at
    FAP?
        Mrs. Johnston. Yes, ma'am. We have the overarching policy
    in the Department, and then, again, we work with the services
    to make sure that all resources are known. Unfortunately, it is
    not a perfect system, and we will continue to work it.
        Ms. Speier. Okay. That really doesn't answer the question
    at all. Just because you are the overarching authority and that
    the services all have to perform their function doesn't mean
    that you don't have a responsibility to demand of them that
    they do a better job of providing information, education. And
    maybe some of these survivors could be of some value to you in
    trying to determine how better you can make that available to
    victims.
        It would seem to me that one of the questions that was
    raised is, is FAP there to provide resources or to somehow make
    a determination as to whether or not a case should move forward
    or not?
        Mrs. Johnston. Yes, ma'am. FAP is absolutely there to
    provide resources, but that is also the function to do a
    determination.
        And, with that, I am going to let Mr. Noyes address that
    issue.
        Mr. Noyes. Thank you, ma'am.
        Chairwoman Speier, I just want to address your question
    about outreach and the awareness of FAP. Certainly, we know
    that we have more work to do. Domestic violence is a scourge,
    and the work that we all have to do together as a community and
    as the DOD means that the best way forward is to ensure that
    prevention and response are coordinated efforts, because we
    know that 70 percent of our families live off installation.
        In terms of how we make service members and their families
    aware of FAP, we have multifaceted awareness campaigns that
    happen in October. And, of course, we understand that that is a
    limited way in which we reach out. It is one way in which we
    reach out.
        We also work with the Department of Defense school system
    to ensure that they are aware of our services. And, in fact,
    they work with families every day and make referrals to FAP
    every day. We have child, youth, and family programs under the
    umbrella of Military Community and Family Policy, who also help
    us in our outreach to families so that they are aware of the
    services that we provide.
        We also work with law enforcement, with command, and with
    the entire Coordinated Community Response, which is the core of
    how we address domestic abuse on the installations. And we work
    together to provide the awareness and the outreach to the
    community to understand the services that we provide and where
    we can be found.
        And, again, we know that there is more to be done. Our
    services often come with some of the things that the victims
    talked about, and that is stigma, not being supported to move
    forward, and certainly that gets attached to FAP at times. And
    we have a lot of work to do to overcome the stigma for people
    approaching Family Advocacy Program, along with our
    intersecting and other components that have the same challenges
    with people coming forward.
        In terms of your other question about accountability and
    whether we are a program that focuses on response,
    interventions, clinical services, support groups and advocacy,
    that is, indeed, our mission. It is separate, as a parallel
    process to the work that command, law enforcement, judges do in
    order to hold offenders accountable.
        We must ensure that FAP is seen as a social service
    provider that protects families working in tandem with the
    Coordinated Community Response that supports them so that law
    enforcement, command, and the court, the military court system
    can hold them accountable for domestic abuse, child abuse and
    neglect, and the other intervening forms of violence and harm--
    --
        Ms. Speier. All right. Mr. Noyes, my time is almost
    expired. Let me just say this: Two out of the three victims
    today didn't even know you existed. We have made trips to bases
    around the country, talked to spouses. Oftentimes, they don't
    know you exist.
        So you have got to look at another way of communicating
    with families because the existence of your resource is there;
    it is being underutilized or not utilized at all. And I think
    that we need you to show greater accountability. I might also
    add that I think that when there is domestic violence, to bring
    counseling together for the two parents and try and keep the
    family together may not be the best strategy, and that appears
    to be one of the efforts that you continue to pursue. And I
    think that will be discussed at another time, but my time is
    expired.
        Mr. Kelly for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Kelly. I am going to go back to the chairwoman's point.
    What additional resources, if any, are necessary by you guys to
    make sure that everyone knows that FAP is available? I mean, is
    there something we can give you or what is a plan of action to
    make sure that at least they have knowledge that you exist? Is
    there a plan of action or can we provide more resources that
    make that so that the majority of--I mean, some people will
    never know, but the majority of people will know that FAP
    exists and what it exists for?
        Mrs. Johnston. To be honest, I was not aware that people
    were not aware. I know that commanders know of FAP. Therefore,
    I think that part of the strategy is a reminder of the
    programs. When there is a FAP case, the commander actually
    oversees the Incident Determination Committee. Would you like
    to----
        Mr. Noyes. Certainly.
        Mr. Kelly. Quickly, because I have got other things I want
    to get to.
        Mr. Noyes. Yes, sir. We have a comprehensive prevention
    plan that expired in 2018, and we are working now to move
    forward to create that new prevention plan, based upon the CDC
    socio-ecological model that other witnesses spoke about
    earlier. Part of that is a comprehensive communications plan,
    working with the intersecting components that work against
    violence, so SAPRO [Sexual Assault Prevention and Response
    Office], Sexual Assault and Harassment, the Office of
    Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. Looking at----
        Mr. Kelly. That is long enough, but here is the bottom
    line: If they don't know about it, it doesn't exist. And so
    figure it out. If you need more resources, let us know. But if
    they don't know about it, it does not exist.
        Going back, can you describe the community-based approach
    to domestic violence prevention and response, and what
    resources do you leverage to do that?
        Mrs. Johnston. Yes, sir. The community-based response is we
    work with those folks outside the gate, who also have programs.
    In some cases, there would be a memorandum of understanding; in
    other cases, a memorandum of agreement. But our programs allow
    us to make sure that both on the base and off the base that we
    are able to offer our services.
        Mr. Kelly. And just as a suggestion, and whether or not--
    you may already do it and I hope that you do, but every base,
    Active Duty base, okay, has a local law enforcement and local
    community there. We need to be plugged in at the hip with their
    victim assistance coordinator, whether that be at the county or
    district level or city level, whatever that is, but we ought to
    be plugged into the hip so that nobody gets the gaps.
        You know, in the military, we always have to protect the
    boundaries. That is where the enemy always likes to attack,
    because nobody is looking. And we need to do the same thing
    with our communities, our cities or counties, whatever the case
    may be. We need to be plugged in with their law enforcement and
    their victim assistance coordinators, to make sure that they
    are not--we ought to be talking. And so, if we are not, at
    least let's make sure we got a plan to talk to communities.
        Mr. Noyes. Thank you, sir. I just want to add that, in
    terms of our connection to the civilian community and the
    partnerships that we have in order to protect domestic abuse
    victims and their families, the domestic violence--I am sorry--
    the domestic abuse victim advocates that are funded through OSD
    [Office of the Secretary of Defense] funding work very closely
    to help support the needs of victims and their families. And
    they work really closely with community-based programs to
    ensure that they have the intersecting supports that, should
    the DAVAs [domestic abuse victim advocates] not be able to
    provide, because of potential overwhelming need or wherever
    there may be a small installation that is isolated that really
    needs the use of community resources to help serve people, that
    they are constantly working and reaching out, going to court,
    helping them get MPOs and CPOs.
        Mr. Kelly. I have only got a minute left, so I want to get
    to the next point. I understand that those who have been
    violent in one context are likely to be violent in another. So
    people who mistreat soldiers or airmen or sailors are also
    likely to be the same ones who are mistreating their spouse.
        So what are we doing to identify and address violent
    behaviors at work that may carry over or that translate into
    domestic violence? What are we doing to train our commanders so
    that they see this bullying at work probably translates into
    bullying at home or domestic violence at home. What are we
    doing to inform and teach commanders and soldiers?
        Mrs. Johnston. I will need to take that back for the
    record. That is not an area that FAP has oversight in.
        Mr. Kelly. And, with that, you know, we have got a long way
    to go. There is nothing more important. But I am going to tell
    you, it all comes down to emphasis. And I would just say,
    whether or not--we can always have more education, but it is
    about transparency, it is about knowledge, and it is about
    educating.
        And so we have got some work to do to make sure that we
    educate the spouses and children to make sure that they know
    about the program and what resources are available.
        And, with that, Chairwoman, I yield back.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Kelly.
        Not to beat a dead horse, but in meetings at the various
    bases, what we heard about FAP was that they showed up at the
    hearing with the survivor, and that was about the extent of it.
    So, while you referenced that just now, I think it is so much
    more than that, and I think you are hearing that from all of us
    here today.
        Do you have any funding for research in your offices?
        Mr. Noyes. We actually do fund research. The services use
    our funding to also fund research that they identify, based
    upon trends and gaps that they see in their communities. We
    work with multiple----
        Ms. Speier. All right. Mr. Noyes, what I think we want then
    is where that money has been spent and what has it been spent
    on because I think we need to know more about when the domestic
    violence occurs.
        I have read one study that suggests it happens upon
    returning from deployment, and if that is the case, then we
    need to make sure there are the appropriate resources available
    to families at those particular junctions.
        Mrs. Davis.
        Mrs. Davis. Thank you. Thank you both for being here.
        Mrs. Johnston, you said to the survivors: We hear you. And
    I think the question often that they are wondering is, do you
    believe us?
        And I am wondering if you have any thoughts or, Mr. Noyes,
    about the extent to which we are talking I would hope about
    perhaps a relatively small number of commands that seem
    predisposed not to believe what survivors bring to them. Can
    you discuss that? Why would that be the case, if you think it
    might be the case?
        Mrs. Johnston. I can't speak to an individual commander and
    what they would be thinking. What I can say is that there is a
    process by which folks come into command, and I would be
    hopeful through that process in most cases we will weed out
    these kinds of issues, but that would be where I would think
    that that would be the place that we would see that.
        Mr. Noyes. In terms of FAP's connection to command and the
    way that they work with command, it is very focused on when a
    victim is being served, either clinically or through a domestic
    abuse victim advocate, assuming that it is an unrestricted
    report, that the FAP manager or other personnel in FAP will
    tell the command, based upon what they have learned in the
    case, about the high risk or safety issues.
        And in that way, that is the way that FAP is working both
    with command and law enforcement is to ensure that they
    understand the gravity of both risk and of safety to ensure
    that appropriate measures can be taken on the command or law
    enforcement side.
        And that is where, in terms of thinking about the
    difference between FAP and the law enforcement and command
    system, where we support victims in sharing what is happening
    to them and the risk attached to that so that then command and
    law enforcement and staff judge advocates will take it from
    there to hold the offender accountable.
        Mrs. Davis. So you have a responsibility then to share that
    information that you receive that could bring the behavior of a
    commander, for example, into question, to follow that through.
    Is that correct or----
        Mr. Noyes. In terms of command response and responsibility,
    it is the services' responsibility to hold them accountable.
    Our role is to ensure that they understand what is happening
    with the victim and the offender in unrestricted cases, and I
    would have to defer to the services otherwise.
        Mrs. Davis. I think we are familiar, obviously, with sexual
    assault in the military, in terms of restricted and
    unrestricted. But in terms of that responsibility to provide
    that information to the command, you are saying that you have
    that responsibility only if it is unrestricted?
        Mr. Noyes. We have a responsibility at FAP first and
    foremost to the victim, being victim-centered and trauma-
    informed. If a victim has chosen a restricted report, she or
    he, they have made that decision for themselves. Our
    responsibility is to ensure that the services and, therefore,
    the services in monitoring the installations follow DOD policy
    as it relates to restricted reports, and that is to provide
    services without informing command and law enforcement, because
    the victim chose that route.
        Mrs. Davis. Chose to do that, okay. And that may be
    something that we should--perhaps in domestic violence, we
    should look at that as it relates to sexual assault as well.
        But my question also is, how do you get feedback? Because
    it seems that perhaps there could be a better way, like what we
    do in commands when we get the climate, you know, every year,
    every few years, right? I don't know whether families would
    necessarily fill out evaluation forms. Maybe that is better for
    research, the RAND Corporation, whoever.
        But how do you know? I mean, could you even say, 10 percent
    of our families, 35 percent of our families have no idea what
    we do versus--how do you go about understanding the extent to
    which people know when they could use your services and that
    they are there so that somebody, you know, even first off
    when--I think, actually, even when people are getting married,
    for example. Because it is the services, it is an important
    thing for people to know, what is available to me? What can I
    count on? How do people do that? What do you know about? Do you
    know how they feel about that?
        Mr. Noyes. So I would say that, in terms of educating,
    which is I believe what you are asking, educating spouses and
    intimate partners about what is available to them, it is back
    to ensuring the Coordinated Community Response is working in
    tandem with us in each piece of their area of work, so mental
    health, hospitals, child and youth programs, education.
        We work together to ensure that each of us shares what we
    know about the other programs as well and have a referral
    mechanism, information and referral mechanism in place so that
    we can make sure that families and----
        Ms. Davis. I think my time is up. I am sorry. I mean,
    Military OneSource is one avenue, perhaps, but----
        Mrs. Johnston. Also, the annual--not annual but biannual
    spouse surveys, where we actually do survey the spouses on a
    variety of topics. So, just this past year, not on the Active
    Duty but in the Reserve, we actually asked the question: Do you
    know FAP? Have you used FAP? Do you know about the New Parent
    Support Program? Have you used the New Parent Support Program?
    So we should be getting those results, and we will be able to
    better tell of the awareness of those.
        Ms. Speier. So, when those results come in, would you
    present them to the committee?
        Mrs. Johnston. Yes, ma'am.
        Ms. Speier. Mr. Kelly.
        Mr. Kelly. I just wanted to follow up on Mrs. Davis'. She
    is talking about a command climate survey which they do every
    time they have a new commander, near the end of that. And so we
    need to look at something so that they at least have the
    opportunity to fill that out so that we get some data on what
    they know and if what they know is true. So I don't know how we
    look at that, but that would be very helpful.
        Ms. Speier. Ms. Escobar for 5 minutes.
        Ms. Escobar. Thank you, Madam Chair.
        So you sat through the first panel and you heard the
    survivors basically say that they had--two of the three--that
    they had no idea that you existed. You heard one of the
    survivors say she had access to zero resources.
        So, having taken that information in and having heard some
    of the questions from some of my colleagues, what, in your
    mind, do you need to do to make this better?
        Mr. Noyes. Family Advocacy Program at DOD has the
    responsibility to monitor compliance with policy at the service
    level. I am committed, and I know Mrs. Johnston is committed as
    well, that in our oversight, we meet with the services
    regularly. We bring issues to them. They bring issues to us. We
    look at challenges and how we might better inform policy or
    practice, what other research might we be doing together.
        And this is a place where, as we are developing a revised
    oversight framework, that quarterly, when we meet with them,
    these issues will be on our agenda so that we begin to figure
    out how better to, one, reach people so that they understand
    these services are available, but also then coordinate on
    planning on where we place priorities moving forward.
        Ms. Escobar. And tell me, if you could, how often do you
    update your outreach plan? Is there an annual strategic
    planning process? Is there a review of where you have been most
    successful, where you have not been most successful? What
    research informs that plan, and who is a part of building that
    plan?
        Mr. Noyes. We work very closely with Military Community
    Outreach, which is partially Military OneSource but also Public
    Affairs, and not only our awareness campaigns but in looking
    back at our prevention plan, both primary, secondary, and
    tertiary prevention, to include communications and outreach.
        It is all part and parcel of a comprehensive planning that
    takes place with the services and with the other components
    that we are involved with under the umbrella of Military
    Community and Family Policy. And all of that work is happening
    now. We expect that, in the prevention work that we are doing
    at the DOD level with other components that address violence
    and harmful behaviors, that comprehensive communication
    strategies and outreach strategies certainly will have to be a
    part of prevention.
        So that work is continuing, and I expect that, within the
    next year or so, we would have a comprehensive plan that speaks
    to communications, outreach, and using the CDC's socio-
    ecological model to address primary prevention.
        Ms. Escobar. So the plan that you say will be ready in
    about a year or two, are you updating an existing plan?
        Mr. Noyes. Part of that work is to update an existing plan.
    That plan was in place 2014 to 2018. We continue to use
    components of it moving forward as we plan either for new
    policy, new practice and standards, or for a strategic plan.
        Ms. Escobar. So am I understanding you update it every 4
    years? Is that what you are saying?
        Mr. Noyes. To my knowledge, the prevention plan was for 5
    years. And now we are looking at making decisions about whether
    we will do another one for 5 years, whether that timeframe
    needs to be different, or whether we need to change our
    strategy and look at creating a prevention policy, including
    communications and outreach, or whether that would need to be
    standards that are brought into DOD policy as well.
        Ms. Escobar. Do you know, in the existing plan as well as
    the plan that you are now proactively working on, what role do
    survivors play in informing that plan?
        Mr. Noyes. Based upon my knowledge, that is some
    significant work that remains to be done. I know that, at the
    service level, they have held focus groups to understand better
    about what survivors and families need in order to address
    domestic abuse. Again, that is done installation to
    installation. It is not policy that DOD imposes on them.
        Ms. Escobar. My time is about to expire. I would offer a
    recommendation. The recommendation is that this process, this
    planning be survivor-centric. That means their voices have to
    be predominant in the planning phase. That means their
    experiences need to be heard so that you all are able to more
    adequately be a presence there for them. They need you. They
    need the services that you provide. They need the outreach. And
    the only way we are going to fix this is if you listen to them.
        Mrs. Johnston. Thank you. We will take that back.
        Ms. Escobar. Thank you. My time is expired.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you, Ms. Escobar.
        Mr. Kelly.
        Mr. Kelly. Just one further suggestion. Exit surveys,
    whether it is through separation, divorce, separation from
    service, I think you could gain a lot of information if you did
    exit surveys with spouses and children when they leave the
    service, especially when they do it separate from the service
    member. I think you could get a lot of helpful information.
        And, with that, I yield back, Madam Chair.
        Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Kelly.
        Mrs. Johnston, Mr. Noyes, thank you very much for
    participating in this hearing. I think you have heard loud and
    clear that there is a lot of work that needs to be done. I
    realize that you are an umbrella entity, but you do meet
    quarterly with each of the services.
        I am, frankly, sick and tired that we have each service
    having a different set of standards and ways of providing
    services to their service members and families. I think there
    should be some consistency across all the services. But, having
    said that, as you meet with them, I think it is going to be
    important for you to ask them to do a comprehensive drill down
    on what the needs are as it relates to domestic violence. I
    understand that you provide all kinds of other services under
    FAP, but specifically as it relates to domestic violence.
        One of the things we heard was that service members will
    oftentimes isolate their spouse and not offer their emails for
    communication purposes. We have got to find a way around that.
    You have got to be able to use email or Facebook or any number
    of other opportunities that exist on these various bases to
    communicate with these families. And certainly your FAP
    programs at each of the services can identify how to do that,
    but that has got to be one of the first steps that I think you
    undertake in order to be able to communicate better and give
    more information to the community that exists.
        So, with that, we will stand adjourned. Thank you.
        [Whereupon, at 4:08 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

    =======================================================================

                                A P P E N D I X

                               September 18, 2019

    =======================================================================

                  PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD

                               September 18, 2019

    =======================================================================

        [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                   [all]