Restraining orders can't ensure safety

While they may have different opinions about the function of restraining orders, analysts, lawyers, scholars and social workers all agree on one thing: a restraining order is not a panacea or a guarantee of safety.

Ting Yen-chi (丁雁琪), Director of Taipei County Government's Center for the Prevention and Control of Domestic Violence and Sexual Abuse (家庭暴力暨性侵害防治中心), acknowledged that Wang's case should be considered as emphasizing the important message that "when a woman is trying to leave her abusive partner, she is in a most hazardous situation."

"Unfortunately," said Frank Huang (黃富源), a leading criminologist and an expert on domestic violence in Taiwan, "not many women who have obtained a restraining order are aware of this."

He said that usually the most dangerous time is during the one week period following the issuance of a restraining order.

"Social workers and police officers should tell protection-seekers about this risk," he said.

"But unlike in the US, here in Taiwan such advice is rarely given and has yet to be written into the practical guidelines issued to social workers and police."

Huang and Ting both pointed out that this does not mean restraining orders are ineffective, but rather that women should take extra precautions to avoid becoming victims of further abuse.

"An important thing is to try any means possible to avoid being found by the abuser, especially during that high-risk period," Ting said.

In addition, "social workers should always advise victims to give photocopies of the restraining order to neighbors and workplace colleagues so they can help maintain a vigil for them," said Wang Pei-ling (王珮玲), head of the prevention division of the Ministry of the Interior's Commission for the Prevention and Control of Domestic Violence.

Suzanne Jackson, a teaching fellow at the Family Law Clinic at the University of Baltimore, suggested that it is important to first figure out the character of the violent offender and then assess whether such a person is likely to be intimidated or infuriated by court intervention.

If it is the latter, she suggested that the victim "better simply leave town and change their name."

Gavin de Becker, a US-based violent-behavior analyst, said in one of his published works The Gift of Fear that the best method of prevention is to leave no access for the abuser to get to the victim, and stressed that shelters for battered women can be helpful in times of trouble.

But this raises another question, Ke Li-ping (柯麗評), a social work supervisor said, "Victims will ask themselves, `Why should I, as the innocent party, live my life like a prisoner or fugitive while the offender is free to do as he pleases?'"

"Society must learn that it is the perpetrators that must be condemned for their violence, not the victims for seeming defenseless."

De Becker commented that in such matters, "safety is always more important than fairness."

But there are many practical difficulties for women seeking refuge, such as the insufficient number of shelters or the sheer inconvenience of living in one.

"Shelters are only a temporary solution, and in addition, courts cannot force women to stay at one, even if it for their own benefit," Wang Pe-ling said.

Huang said that also, due to the fact that restraining orders were introduced into the legal system only just over a year ago, most officials involved had inadequate education and experience in dealing with complications surrounding such court orders.