I have read some good articles this past year challenging all of us that have been part of the domestic violence movement over the last 25-30 years but one article tops my list.  Written by Nicole Allen and Amy Lehrner at the University of Illinois, the article is entitled: “Still a Movement After All These Years? Current Tensions in the Domestic Violence Movement.”   The article raises many issues but for me it helped frame my questions for 2010.  Is the domestic violence movement still moving?  And if it is moving…is it moving forward?  And how are each of us helping to move it forward?

Dr. Lehrner and Dr. Allen developed an excellent small scale study that focused on assessing the movement through in-depth interviews with advocates working for domestic violence policy and direct service organizations.  Their analysis then focused on three critical issues:  1) advocates’ reflections on the state of the domestic violence movement; 2) challenges and dilemmas facing the movement; and 3) advocates’ visions for the future.  Their article has been slowly circulating throughout the country over the last six months.

Their primary conclusions and observations form the foundation for a powerful dialogue in the months and years to come.  First, they found that few of the advocates working in the trenches knew the history of the movement.  “With no foundation in the history of the movement or its analysis, participants framed the work and goals of domestic violence agencies in terms of service provision”, they wrote, with little understanding of the socio-political context of domestic violence.  Though public awareness and outreach were a priority for some, there was little context for such priorities.  They also found that advocates lacked the guiding, overarching principles that should be the foundation for such priorities and which provide an understanding of the causes of domestic violence.

Second, the researchers found that because of the journey of the movement, and the resources and allies that have joined the movement over the last thirty years, there has been a waning of the social change orientation of the movement toward a “professionalization” and “therapeutically oriented social service agenda.”  Such a phenomenon is natural in social changes movements but not necessarily a positive step forward in our work to advocate for an end to intimate partner violence.

Third, most women of color who participated viewed the entire movement as a “white women’s movement” and described a strong sense that the movement as a whole has failed to understand cultural context and alienated many who do not see violence only through explicitly feminist gender politics.  This blind spot has often ignored the significance and impact of discrimination and racism in looking at the impacts of violence and abuse in the lives of women of color.

Finally, they pointed out how little mentoring is going on in a movement that needs to raise the next generation of innovators, leaders, and change agents.  Many advocates complained about the lack of mentoring and coaching from those that came before them.  Indeed, the administrators who were interviewed were not holders of the history and therefore had little ability to pass it on to others.

Lehrner and Allen describe much of what they heard in this way: “…safety for victims might require hiding them but…advocates who consider this the extent of their work do so at their peril.  In addition to protecting victim safety, movement advocates must cultivate collaborations and openness with local communities.  Historically, this has proven difficult when the values and politics of movement advocates and community members were not necessarily in alignment.”  The advocates in the study who saw this issue pointed out that “failure to engage with local communities constrains both the nature of interventions with victims and the possibilities for creative new approaches to social change.”   The authors conclude that these dynamics and the inability of the movement founders and leading feminist shelter organizations to focus on much more than crisis intervention and survival has had a powerful devolutionary effect.  “The end result is a potential devolution of the movement into the exclusive provision of direct services concurrent with a shifting service philosophy that conceptualizes intervention as the provision of mental health services.”  Such a result will not lead to empowerment of survivors of domestic violence or to a victim-centered, victim autonomy focus in the movement.

In fairness to many in the movement that have been reaching out to build partnerships and collaborations for decades; the article fails to really acknowledge just how many successful efforts have been made locally, nationally, and internationally to build partnerships and collaborations.  It also fails to really examine the powerful barriers and hostility that the movement has run into at so many points from entrenched interests, anti-feminist value systems, sexist value systems, and male-dominated civil and criminal justice systems.

But the article is worth reading.

It fascinates me that the ideas raised in the article were all identified by advocates in community-based domestic violence organizations.  It was not made up by those in the criminal or civil justice systems, the child welfare community, the medical profession, the faith community, or others who came late to this movement.  The call to mentor those who come behind us, the reminder to stay committed to the social change and advocacy focus of the movement, the need to think outside the box, and the call to honor our history but be willing to continue to pursue innovation, collaboration, and community mobilization and engagement strategies (no matter what the obstacles or opposition), came from those who are officially “inside” the historical core of the movement.  Now, all of us that care about stopping domestic violence and promoting the ongoing “movement” of the movement need to take heed and move… forward.  We are not done.  We have not found the ways yet to stop most intimate partner violence.  The vast majority of those in our communities and in our country are still not engaged in our dreams and passions for this work.  The volume of the message is still muted in the everyday lives of most Americans.  Has progress been made?  Yes.  Should we celebrate the successes of the last 20 years?  Yes.  But too many people still need to join us.  Too many people are still missing from our striving toward the tipping point in this great struggle.

Their article challenged me and it should cause us to think through what it says even if we don’t agree with it and even if they did not do justice to the amazing, successful, powerful collaborative efforts that have occurred for many years.  How do we continue to cherish and honor our feminist roots and the importance of the gender analysis critical to understanding most domestic violence while also acknowledging the powerful ways we must keep moving forward?  How do we address violence in gay and lesbian relationships, violence by women, and the complex dynamics of generational abuse perceived as normative by both boys and girls who grow up in homes with domestic violence?  How do we keep innovating, trying new approaches to social change, community mobilization, co-location of services, the development of local communities of diverse advocates who then help change the local culture and values around the issue of domestic violence?  How do we avoid fighting over the small pie we all split instead of working together to make the pie so very much bigger?  How do we avoid the trend toward treating all domestic violence victims as prospective mental health clients?

I am hopeful.  The work of Ellen Pence and the Advocacy Institute that OVW is funding is an excellent step forward.  The work of Esta Soler and the Family Violence Prevention Fund in the national and international prevention arena should cause us all to think more proactively.  The work of Denise Gamache and the Battered Women’s Justice Project to make sure our training is state of the art of always evidence-based is a critical component of relevance and credibility.  The outreach and training of Agnes Maldonado and Alianza to state domestic violence coalitions nationwide has moved forward the commitment to diversity in the movement.  The vision and thinking of Dr. Oliver Williams at the Institute for Domestic Violence in the African American Community has opened the dialogue on many subjects not often talked about that impact African-American women and men.  The leadership of Gael Strack at the National Family Justice Center Alliance has challenged all of us to be more engaged in bringing agencies and disciplines together while seeking to stay true to guiding principles from the core of the movement. The leadership of Sue Else and her growing strategic partnerships with business and corporate leaders and her challenge to local, state, and national programs to keep evolving, looking outward, and growing — are all very positive steps forward.  But there is still too much tension whenever we talk about new ideas or innovative approaches in local communities.  Often those who want to do both social change and service delivery together, get charged with ignoring “victim safety” or “confidentiality” the hallmark words at the core of the movement.  But we must ultimately have many more solutions than victim safety (which is crucial but often only viewed as a short term issue) and confidentiality (which is often a barrier to coordinated, supportive advocacy services from all available supporters of accountability for the offender and long-term safety for the victim).

The domestic violence movement must reach out more proactively to the child welfare movement.  The Greenbook Initiative made clear how important it is for the domestic violence movement to continue the many ways that the domestic violence movement has reached out over the years.  But we must keep reaching out and framing the issues around children exposed from a domestic violence perspective.  We must be more creative in creating services for male victims of domestic violence and we must be more diligent in applying what we have learned about wraparound services for victims to the massive need to provide wraparound services for aggressors.  We cannot stop.  We cannot slow down because we are tired.  We cannot rest because there are so many barriers to efforts at relationship building and partnerships.  We cannot become hardened to the ongoing call for change from those within the movement itself simply because we are cynical of the young, the energetic, and the creative.

Bess Bendet and the Blue Shield Foundation of California have rightly challenged us all to focus on the critical importance of leadership in the movement and in our organizations, on mentoring of the next generation, and on succession planning.  They have also challenged us to critically analyze our organizations, our structures, and our strategic directions as we move forward.  Other powerful foundations like Robert Wood Johnson, Allstate, Verizon, Avon, and others are all looking for the movement to keep moving, growing, evolving, changing, and advancing.  They don’t want to simply pass out small dollars for minimal impact.  They want major impacts and major progress as they invest their dollars.  They want us to help them to change the world.  It is a blessing to have strong leaders in the philanthropic world who understand the crucial importance of the movement to keep moving…forward.  The economic landscape is strewn with businesses that did not keep adapting, changing, and evolving.  Major brand names that were thriving ten years ago are now closed or barely surviving.  Why?  Because they did not adapt, did not listen enough to their customers, and did not keep forming strategic alliances.  It is a powerful reminder to keep listening to survivors as we move forward.

A few weeks ago, in Richmond, California we heard from a courageous survivor during a planning meeting for the West Contra Costa County Family Justice Center.  “Rhonda” stood before us and said these words:  “Please don’t forget how hard it is for us to get out and get help.  Please keep listening, please keep figuring out how to help in better ways, and please include us as you go forward.”  A fitting challenge for all of us…honor our past, invest ourselves in the next generation of leaders, and always make sure that we are accountable to survivors as we continue moving…forward.

—————————————————

i. To obtain a copy of the article, click on: http://vaw.sagepub.com/cgi/rapidpdf/1077801209332185v1.

ii. To view a power point overview of the article by Nicole Allen and Amy Lehrner, click on: http://www.blueshieldcafoundation.org/assets/files/reports/Tensions%20and%20Opportunities%20in%20the%20Domestic%20Violence%20Movement.pdf