Doubts raised over protection orders

The morning of Aug. 4 should have been just like any other for Wang Te-hsiao (王德孝).

She had driven alone to work in Sanchung City (三重), Taipei County. Wang parked her car just before 9am, a few minutes shy of her starting time.

But as Wang opened the driver's side door, she was surprised to see her husband, Lee Chao-Hsiung (李朝雄), who she had taken out a restraining order against on July 25.

Police say Lee had been laying in wait. According to official records, he stabbed his wife 38 times, killing her and leaving her 2-year-old son without a mother.

As shocking as the murder may be, experts say cases of abusive husbands murdering their spouses are not all that rare.

While Wang was one of many women in abusive relationships who had sought a restraining order since the legal instrument's introduction 13 months ago, she was the first to be murdered after a restraining order was in place.

Now, Wang's murder has raised new questions about whether restraining orders are an effective means of protecting women from their violent spouses or boyfriends.

After the murder, Lee told the police that he killed Wang because he was angered by her petition for two restraining orders, one protecting Wang and one protecting her son that was taken out on July 10.

Blaming protection orders for violence

Some suggest that in seeking a restraining order, Wang may have provoked her husband to respond with violence.

But scholars and women's activists are cautious not to draw any quick conclusions.

"It's a hasty inference that killings are a result of the offender's discontent over restraining orders," said Yu Mei-nu (尤美女), an attorney and activist for the rights of domestic violence victims.

Although she isn't familiar with the Wang case, Yu said that in general, "the abusers are good in finding excuses and shifting responsibility to the victims. The bad feeling over a restraining order may be just an excuse."

Still, some say that violent spouses are controlling, and obtaining a restraining order could be interpreted as defiance of that control by a domineering husband.

"A woman is at greatest risk when she tries to leave her abuser," said Thomas Green, chair of the department of public policy and administration at National University in San Diego, California. "The issuance of a temporary restraining order is often linked to increased violence or homicide."

Studies in the US indicate pattern

In his book The Gift of Fear, Gavin de Becker, a leading expert on the prediction and management of violence, also warned of American society's over-reliance on restraining orders, citing the many cases in which women have been murdered after they had obtained a restraining order.

To de Becker, the reason is simple: an abuser is a person who likes to exercise control over his victim and has a strong hatred of another's refusal. And a petition for restraining order is a blatant refusal to the abuser.

Ke Li-ping (柯麗評), a social work supervisor at the modern women's foundation, agrees. "The abuser regards the abused as inferior, and would react to the victim's petition as, `How dare you try to escape my rule!'"

Green noted that, according to US studies, it is typical for violent relationships to escalate.

A petition can be the precipitating event pushing the offender over the edge, however, "It is not unreasonable to suggest that the victim would have been killed later instead of sooner," Green said.