Can We Stop Calling It Domestic Violence?

A case for bringing back “assault and battery”

By Justine Barron

Maybe we should stop calling violence against partners “domestic violence.” Maybe we should even do away with the classification? I’m not sure! It makes sense to me. Or, it did after watching Judge Judy one day.

There was this defendant who was accused of not taking care of one of his seven to nine kids. He wasn’t sure how many he had. I’m not exaggerating. Let’s call him “Bo,” because I do remember that his name was monosyllabic. Let’s assume that it was short for “Beauregard,” because I’m not a classist. I was watching Judge Judy at a fast food gyro stand, after all.

Bo lost. He had to pay six months of diaper and food money. I do wish Ms. Judy had recommended family court, but they only have ten minutes of TV time per case. Also, the show is probably fake, according to my friend who is a paid extra on court shows. (In that case, good acting, Beauregard.)

Anyway, more to the point, Judge Judy asked Bo if he had a criminal record. He said that he had one arrest but “just for domestic violence.” They didn’t discuss it further. I haven’t been able to stop thinking about this moment.

I used to have to write about domestic violence for my job. I have always strongly disliked the phrase “domestic violence,” and lately, with the Ray Rice case, I’m seeing it used daily in the media.

When the Bos of the world apply for jobs, their potential employers (more often men) might also think they were “just” guilty of domestic violence. They might think, “fights happen” or that it’s not relevant to the job. The sports world has proven this, most publicly. If your average Bo got pulled over for reckless driving, the officer might not consider his record any sign of his general lawlessness. The little shame Bo felt for “just” being a domestic offender is still supported by much of his community in 2014.

Vice President Joe Biden, who helped draft the Violence Against Women Act, recently said: “The one regret I have is, we call it domestic violence as if it’s a domesticated cat.”

The language is soft and out-of-date: women are no longer domestic creatures, and relationship violence happens to men too. The feds have changed the official terminology to “intimate partner violence,” but that just sounds more cozy to me! I think we need more than a name change. We may need to change how domestic violence is classified.

What about assault and battery?

What if, instead of a domestic violence record, Bo had dozens or even hundreds of counts of assault and/or battery, one for each time he beat his wife? Would he tell Judge Judy he had “just a dozen aggravated assaults”?

I know that domestic violence cases can include multiple counts. That is the rarity. Most often, cases involve only one count, and a shocking majority of these are dismissed. In practice, it is common for domestic violence charges to serve as a blanket for a pattern of violence.

In my scenario, when a police officer is called to a home where a partner has been beaten, s/he would be required to ask the victim, “Has this happened before? How many times?” and to document as many as possible by type — e.g., aggravated battery, assault with intent to kill, rape, and so on. I realize that this data would be hard to collect and prove, but not impossible, right?

Many abusive men (and women) do not view themselves as criminals. They take care not to beat up their coworkers or strangers. If they knew that their attacks were considered on the exact same level as street violence, maybe they would be more cautious or feel more shame. Maybe not, because some abusers do get off on the unlimited power trip. Maybe their victims would feel empowered to document events and speak up. Maybe not, because abuse makes that difficult. A lot could change. Maybe. Based on my experience, I have some hope.

In many states, not all, assault or battery is the base crime and domestic violence gets an additional charge, like how hate crime works. This seems justifiable. Still, the data doesn’t reflect that abusers go to jail more often or for longer than other violent offenders. In fact, the opposite. Unfortunately, the penalties around domestic violence vary widely across states. Felony assault is not nearly as divergent. I worry that the special classification of domestic violence weakens and politicizes rather than strengthens it.

Please consider: Our system holds domestic violence so special that, in many states, we mandate batterers to attend therapy, specially designed to address their issues. Colorado, for one, mandates therapy for domestic violence but not for traditional battery. Once a case goes through various motions, therapy can comprise the entire sentence! Why is a criminal more worthy of redemptive therapy if he knew his victim and beat her often? How can we prevent relationship abuse if it so rarely faces serious penalties?

It seems possible that both the crime of domestic violence and the classification of the crime come from the same underlying patriarchal structures.

Clearly, I’m not discounting the value of the domestic violence movement. I’m no Fox News. We have needed to criminalize violence in the home and create shelters and protections. Rates have declined, though not nearly as quickly as for other crimes. There hasn’t been enough money, attention, or support for these issues! I just think it’s time to graduate the system.

To be fair, I’m assuming a lot — that it would be easy to make so many assault charges stick, that the legal losses wouldn’t outweigh the current gains. I’m just asking questions. Some things certainly still need to change.

Semantic preferences may mean a lot

This isn’t an easy subject for me. Judge Judy is more fun. I used to go into robot mode at work when I had to write about it, because I hadn’t resolved my own experiences. I didn’t want to align myself with victims or even “survivors” as we started calling them. I felt and sometimes still feel that my relationships were complex and that I deserved it. Classic!

When I do accept that I was a victim, I will say that I don’t prefer the special care of special laws. I was assaulted repeatedly. “Domestic violence” sounds vague and insufficiently punitive. “Assault,” “battery” — those feel empowering and specific. That’s just me! (Is it?)

Let me end by asking for your consideration with one public situation: When you see evidence that another person is beaten in an elevator, consider doing her the honor of calling it as such — an assault. Consider not calling it something more, about which you know nothing anyway. With all due respect.