• Search for:

• Categories

  • Announcement
  • child sexul assault
  • Diversity
  • Guest Post
  • Human Trafficking
  • Humorless Feminist
  • Legal Servivces
  • Motivating Moments
  • News
  • Powerful Women
  • Prevention
  • Privacy
  • Public Policy
  • Resource
  • sexual assault awareness & prevention month
  • sexual assault laws
  • sexual harrassment
  • Stalking
  • Uncategorized
  • Vlog

• Recent Comments

  • Patricia - Spiritual Journey Of A Lightworker on “Owning” Change
  • Gabriel on Sexual Assault on College Campuses: What you Need to Know
  • Rose Luna on Politics on a Personal Level
  • Adam on Politics on a Personal Level
  • Linda Hunter on Toning Down the Political Rhetoric on Women

• Admin

  • Register
  • Log in
  • Entries RSS
  • Comments RSS
  • WordPress.org

• Archives

  • ▼2012 (13)
    • ▼May (1)
      • You do the math
    • ▶April (4)
    • ▶March (4)
    • ▶February (2)
    • ▶January (2)
  • ▶2011 (36)
    • ▶November (2)
    • ▶October (3)
    • ▶September (4)
    • ▶July (4)
    • ▶June (5)
    • ▶May (4)
    • ▶April (7)
    • ▶March (2)
    • ▶February (2)
    • ▶January (3)
  • ▶2010 (35)
    • ▶December (3)
    • ▶November (4)
    • ▶October (4)
    • ▶September (7)
    • ▶August (4)
    • ▶July (1)
    • ▶May (3)
    • ▶April (4)
    • ▶March (1)
    • ▶February (1)
    • ▶January (3)
  • ▶2009 (45)
    • ▶December (2)
    • ▶November (3)
    • ▶October (3)
    • ▶September (1)
    • ▶August (1)
    • ▶July (3)
    • ▶June (5)
    • ▶May (5)
    • ▶April (10)
    • ▶March (5)
    • ▶February (6)
    • ▶January (1)
  • ▶2008 (15)
    • ▶December (2)
    • ▶November (2)
    • ▶October (4)
    • ▶September (4)
    • ▶June (1)
    • ▶March (2)
  • ▶2007 (2)
    • ▶October (1)
    • ▶September (1)

The uproar over the current airport screening measures is being heard loud and clear. TAASA has received more inquiries on this issue than any other in recent memory.  TAASA wants to be cognizant of our collective security issues as well as offer a reasoned response to the legitimate concerns and fears of travelers across our state and country.

Our concerns are four-fold:

We are troubled by the potential for sexual assault survivors to be triggered by the imaging screening or pat down they experience.

We are also uneasy about the general public being subjected to such invasive and unnerving procedures that  have obviously made some passengers feel more violated than inconvenienced but safer.  

We are also worried that there may be some serious gaps in adequate training for TSA agents on how to best screen passengers who may have sensitive physical or emotional issues that need to be factored into the normal indignities of losing control and privacy over one’s own body.

Finally, we find it distressing that TSA’s own hiring practices do not necessarily preclude a sex offender with a conviction longer than 7 years ago from hire as a screener.

Let me be clear: my intent is not to demonize the TSA screeners.  They have a job to do, and I am certain the vast majority of them are doing this job to the very best of their ability.  They are following a directive, and one can be pretty sure this is not the best part of their workday either. I do not believe however that this procedure is well-thought out, as the unintended consequences illustrate. 

On the surface it seems the argument has been presented as one of collective security versus individual privacy. I would contend otherwise.   Is this screening reactive or effective?  Are these screening procedures the best methods for identifying potential terrorists? If you can refuse the imaging screening and opt for a pat down, what stops potential terrorists from simply inserting the explosive into their body cavity, like drug mules have been known to do, to avoid detection?   Will screening procedures ramp up to include full body-cavity searches if we discover terrorists using this method of transport? How far will we be willing to go?

Dogs trained to sniff out explosives are being used effectively in war zones.  Why are we not using these canines at airport security lines?  Have we explored all potential screening methods available to us? Were these methods chosen because they are the very best options available, or were they chosen in part because of simplicity or cost? I do not claim to have the simple answers to these very complex issues, but I do feel certain that we need to gauge the impact of these actions on the citizenry.

I implore the federal  government to find tangible ways to further minimize travelers from feeling victimized, while using all deliberate speed to implement less invasive methods of screening.  There are folks trained in victim issues all across this country ready and willing to help security professionals strike this delicate balance.

The Texas PINK OUT kicked off to a rousing start yesterday!  Check out how the Dallas Area Rape Crisis Center participated in this statewide (and beyond) effort to affirm that “People Are People” and discourage homophobia and gender stereotyping.
(Oh, yes…if you don’t blink, you’ll see some TAASA staff doing the PINK OUT.)

 I’d love to see (if you’ve got some photos) and hear (videos, maybe?) how you and/or your organization are participating in the Texas PINK OUT. (Send them to me at lhunter@taasa.org). Do you think the effort will make a positive difference?  Or perhaps you see it as “okay, gets some attention, but won’t really change much”? 

After I hear from you, I think I’ll have to say a bit about how it’s made me think more than I maybe wanted to!

“Behave,” a special episode of Law and Order:  Special Victim’s Unit will air tonight at 8 p.m.  CST on NBC.  Written by executive producer, Neal Baer, the episode spotlights the backlog of untested evidence collection kits and how that backlog affects survivors and allows perpetrators to escape any accountability for their crimes.

In her Sept. 24 SVU Production blog Mariska Hargitay says,

One of the most rewarding aspects of working on SVU is the show’s ability to shine a light on the problem of sexual violence. This next episode is one of the most meaningful I have ever done, and it stands as a powerful example of the way we aim to raise awareness about these difficult issues.

Rape crisis hotlines may expect an increase in calls during and following the episode which includes information about the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network (RAINN).

When Mariska Hargitay began her role as Detective Olivia Benson on SVU over 10 years ago, she wasn’t prepared for the kinds of “fan” letters she received from victims telling her of sexual assaults they’d suffered, some many years before.  For many of the survivors, Mariska was the first person they’d told about the assault. She was deeply touched by their stories—and motivated to use her visibility and influence to do something about what she saw as a “silenced epidemic.”

I felt a great responsibility to these brave men and women and wanted them to know that they had been heard and that they could have hope. I studied the subject, trained to become a crisis counselor, and used my visibility as an actress to become an advocate.

So, in 2004 Mariska founded the Joyful Heart Foundation, an organization dedicated to helping survivors heal and reclaim their lives.  Since that time, Mariska’s (and the foundation’s) work to bring a voice to the “silenced epidemic” of sexual violence has expanded significantly.

In May she joined survivors, activists, experts and legislators who testified on the rape kit backlog before the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. Testimony urged legislators to enact victim-centered reforms and prevent future backlogs.   Mariska specifically stressed that survivors must be at the center of the dialogue and reforms.

These kits represent human beings who have suffered greatly. Testing their rape kits sends victims the fundamental and crucial message that they and their cases matter. Not testing them sends the opposite message.

On Wednesday, the Joyful Heart Foundation will launch a new web project designed to serve as a comprehensive resource on the evidence collection kit backlog:  www.endthebacklog.org.

You can also find excellent resources at http://www.nsvrc.org/projects/eliminating-rape-kit-backlog.

Watch the episode with me tonight.  Then share your responses here or on TAASA’s Facebook page.

“…received eight life sentences for his inappropriateness with a 13-year old girl.”

Inappropriateness?  What on earth does someone do that’s “inappropriate” to end up in jail, much less prison for eight life sentences?

Reading or hearing something like this makes me want to scream!  I want to yell, inappropriately for sure, “Why can’t we call sexual assault, sexual abuse and rape what they are?”  I think it’s important that reporters correctly identify and name these crimes instead of resorting to euphemisms and vague language.  I want to be fair to the writers of this newspaper article .   Most of the report details the trial in which a local resident was found guilty of aggravated sexual assault of a child and continuous sexual abuse of a young child.  They clearly named those crimes.

They didn’t use terms that minimize victimization or totally obscure the crime.

Until the article’s end, that is.  There we learn this was the second sex offender to be sentenced in four months.    It was the first who “received eight life sentences for his inappropriateness with a 13-year old girl.”

So what do I do beyond feeling angry and frustrated that still it seems so hard to call sexual assault what it is?   I’d like to talk to the two writers, who are both new in the community.  I want to thank them for writing about a child sexual abuse trial and highlighting how important it is for the community to work together to combat sexual abuse.  And then I want to talk about the “inappropriateness with a-13 year old” phrase.

Perhaps now that I’ve cooled down a bit, I can do that.  Any suggestions for what I should say?

This epidemic is hidden, literally behind bars.  Just Detention International (JDI) called rape and sexual abuse in detention an epidemic after the Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics released results of the 2008-09 nationwide survey of inmates in federal and state prisons as well as county jails.

Statistic after statistic shows us a glimpse of rape and abuse in these facilities, but it’s the letters JDI receives every week from survivors of sexual abuse held in detention that make the epidemic personal.

“I would misbehave to get locked up [in solitary confinement] so I didn’t have to deal with it.” — Abused by an officer in Texas

“What do I do? Risk an attempt on my life and initiate an investigation, or keep quiet and endure?” — Silence and fear in Nevada

“I’ve come to accept that I am a victim and a survivor of abuse by corrections officers.  I totally accept the retaliation I will receive from government employees for speaking to you.” — Courage from undisclosed location

So what’s being done to stem the increasing victimization of women, men and youth who have no escape from their victimizers?

Or more to the point, what’s not being done?   JDI’s press release emphasizes the need for action now on standards detailed in the Prison Rape Elimination Act (PREA):

For the past 14 months, the Justice Department has been reviewing proposed national standards aimed at eliminating sexual violence in detention, which were also mandated by PREA. These standards include limitations on cross-gender supervision. They also call for staff training and inmate education, the provision of medical and mental health treatment to sexual abuse victims, and regular independent, external audits to hold agencies accountable for failures to keep inmates safe from abuse. By law, Attorney General Eric Holder had until June 23, 2010 to ratify binding standards, but he missed this deadline and no new date has been set. Once the Attorney General issues final standards, they will be immediately binding on federal facilities. States and localities will have one year to get into compliance or risk losing five percent of their corrections-related federal funding.

So what’s the holdup?  Every day the epidemic increases—person by person by person, not statistic by statistic. I think it’s way past time to put these minimum safeguards into effect.  What about you?

Texas advocates examined the repercussions of Arizona’s SB 1070 on victim advocacy at TAASA’s (Texas Association Against Sexual Assault) Diversity Task Force meeting in May.  Isaac Harrington, VAWA attorney with Texas Civil Rights Project, and Laura Zárate, co-founder and executive director of Arte Sana, discussed the implications of this law on victims based on their personal and professional experiences.

Advocates explored the complications for both victims and service providers through the following key points:

1. Victim rights as human rights
2. Gap of services to immigrant populations
3. Increased  isolation and fear within the immigrant populations
4. Anonymization of crime against immigrant populations
5. Concern regarding “moving, concealing, harboring aliens “– as stated in section 13-2929 of the statute
6. Action Steps for Advocates (Created by ALAS, an online group of Latina advocates from across the country)

The topic of immigration is highly political, personal and polarizing.   The need for proactive discussion is crucial and the challenge before us is clear.  Is it possible to set aside political and personal beliefs to carefully examine the impact of this type of law on victims? The essence of advocacy is to support and promote the interests of another.  Several states are considering similar measures including Texas.  Are we as advocates prepared to assert our concerns about this type of law to elected officials and the community at large? The immigration policy debate rarely considers immigrant victims of crime. During the last Diversity Task Force meeting advocates from across the state of Texas vowed to defend and advocate on behalf of those victims.  Mother Teresa once said, “Let us touch the dying, the poor, the lonely and the unwanted according to the graces we have received and let us not be ashamed or slow to do the humble work.”

Thanks to the passion and foresight of victim advocates, proactive discussions on this highly charged topic are alive and well in Texas.   The upcoming legislative session promises to provoke and engage all sides of the issue.  Where do you stand?

Every year, more than 100,000 men, women and children are victimized while behind bars, usually by corrections officials whose very job it is to keep them safe. The U.S. Attorney General is currently reviewing national standards aimed at preventing and addressing this type of abuse.

On Monday, TAASA, along with thirty rape crisis centers, submitted comments in support of the standards.  If fully implemented, the national standards will spare countless Americans the horror of sexual abuse.

We are pleased to submit these comments and firmly believe that everyone – regardless of custody status – should be free of sexual violence.

To read TAASA’s comments letter, please click here.

Find out more about efforts to end sexual abuse in all forms of detention at Just Detention International.

KVUE’s Noelle Newton interviewed me about no-report sexual assault exams. Here is some background information about the new law.

Sexual Assault Exams Are Now Available Without Police Involvement

If a sexual assault victim is not ready to get police involved, she or he still has the option to have a sexual assault examination conducted. No police report is required.

What is a Non-Report Sexual Assault Exam?

A sexual assault examination (also called a medical forensic exam) is a procedure conducted by a medical professional to treat and diagnose a victim of sexual assault while also collecting evidence of the crime.

“Non-report sexual assault exam” refers to the same examination, except the survivor can choose to involve police much later or not at all. There is no law requiring medical facilities to report sexual assaults of adults to law enforcement, so the decision to report is entirely the survivor’s.

Why is a Sexual Assault Exam Important if the Victim Doesn’t Report?

Privacy is of paramount importance to most sexual assault survivors. Survivors often need time to prepare themselves before reporting since criminal investigations and prosecutions are often invasive and exhausting.

However, the immediate collection of forensic evidence is extremely important in sexual assault cases. It can mean the difference between a conviction and a dismissal – or even failing to identify the perpetrator at all. Evidence a perpetrator leaves behind after a sexual assault is especially vulnerable to contamination or being washed away. An immediate sexual assault exam allows for the collection of corroborating evidence to support a victim’s allegations in the criminal justice system.

Non-report sexual assault examinations balance the needs of the victim and the criminal justice system by allowing survivors to preserve important evidence to use against their attackers and still take the time they need to decide whether to report.

Victims who are unsure about reporting their attacks to authorities may seek more information about the reporting process from their local sexual assault prevention and assistance programs. These programs provide survivors with support, confidential services, and an advocate to accompany victims to the emergency room.

Is a Non-Report Sexual Assault Exam Confidential?

Yes. Any evidence collected during a non-report exam remains confidential. To protect victim privacy, the evidence is assigned a unique identifier instead of the victim’s name.

The unique identifier is then used to identify the evidence, not the victim. Only if the victim chooses to report the sexual assault at a later time is the Department of Public Safety able to link the evidence to the victim.

Read more

The  Office of the Attorney General of Texas recently released this law enforcement update that we felt was important to share.

Recovering from a sexual assault is an intensely personal ordeal that is different for each survivor. Initially, some victims will justifiably react with shock, disbelief and fear. Everyday activities may be disrupted, including eating and sleeping. Victims may feel the need to change their address, job or lifestyle in order to regain their sense of security. With so much difficulty to overcome, victims should not also face financial hardship, which is why the Texas Legislature created the Texas Compensation for Victims of Crime (CVC) Fund. Recently, the Office of the Attorney General, which administers this vitally important fund, reached a significant milestone: $1 billion in payments to crime victims.

Last year alone, the CVC Fund provided reimbursement for more than 8,500 sexual assault exams and sexual assault examination kits. A sexual assault examination is not medical treatment, but rather a part of the criminal investigation. The exam is performed by medical personnel, who carefully collect and preserve crucial evidence that law enforcement uses to identify sexual assault perpetrators. Immediate medical needs and referrals for follow-up care also will be addressed at the time of a victim’s hospital visit.

Sexual assault victims are not charged for a forensic sexual assault exam. The kits are paid for by local law enforcement agencies, which seek reimbursement from the CVC Fund. For years the Fund has covered, and will continue to cover, the costs of sexual assault forensic examinations and kits.

Sexual assault victims decide for themselves whether to report the crime to law enforcement. Victims are more comfortable seeking medical help than they are reporting a crime. Those victims are helped by a new law that became effective June 19. Under House Bill 2626, the Department of Public Safety (DPS) pays for sexual assault examinations when victims have not reported the assault to law enforcement at the time of treatment. DPS then seeks reimbursement from the CVC Fund. Read more

The arrest of Harvard professor Henry Louis Gates by Cambridge Police Sgt. Crowley sparked a national debate on race relations when Gates accused Crowley of racism. The tension surrounding the discussion is mounting. During a routine weekly visit, my brother inquired about my thoughts on “Gates vs. Crowley.” The discussion quickly disintegrated into a shouting match reminiscent of our “Longhorns vs. Aggies” arguments during Thanksgiving. Both of us received fragments of information from news sound bites, hardly a comprehensive approach to obtaining information. My interpretation of the facts was contrary to his. All the diversity training in the world could not restrain our knee-jerk reactions. Even President Obama, most often characterized as deliberating and thoughtful, was caught in the firestorm when he uttered a statement he later acknowledged as “unfortunate” and a teachable moment.

My brother and I finally agreed to disagree, neither conceding to each other’s point of view and no closer to understanding the root of the problem. A meeting over beers is scheduled for Professor Gates, Sgt. Crowley and President Obama this week. Is alcohol diplomacy enough to quell the deep-seated emotional debate? What exactly is the teachable moment? Will the painful truths finally get addressed? Or will this teachable moment merely pass unsettled?

← Previous Page — Next Page →