Health Care Reform – Where are Women’s Needs Met?

April 15, 2010

In the overall health care reform, I am relieved to learn that sexual assault and domestic violence cannot be used as “pre-existing conditions” anymore. The practice had carried a chilling message of continued silence– which allowed the carnage carried on at home to remain in the home. However, and I know this may be hard to imagine, but I think Congress largely ignored women’s needs in the overall health care reform debate because the extent of consideration surrounding women’s needs amounted to continued control over our bodies and choices.

As I listened to the debate, I was reminded of the threat women seem to pose to the larger societal structure. Apparently, by opening the health care reform discussion, Congress provided an opportunity for legislation to deny our basic right to reproductive health and justice.   The venom spewed around the media about “baby-killing” and the attempts to give insurance carriers to right to refuse coverage of birth control while reimbursing for Viagra was painful just to hear.

When the debate heated up and the bill looked doomed unless the restrictions to our rights were inserted, women’s health needs became dispensable.  Women became invisible again.  Maybe we had never stopped being dispensable for even progressive legislators dropped our right to reproductive justice.   And, justifications for this negligence flew everywhere.  I noticed legislators rolling their patronizing eyes when we wanted to fight the exclusions. Afterall, “why couldn’t women take one for the team?” they implied. And, that makes me wonder, whose team?   Are we not equals?  Where else can a non-medical group legislate a legal medical procedure?   Is it just coincidence that this procedure involves women’s choice in reproductive decision making?

I naively believed that our fight for basic rights was over.  After fighting for reproductive justice for so long, I thought we could move on.  I was wrong, but I’m tired.  Young women and men must take up the battle with passion and vigor.  This is an emergent issue.  If we can’t get recognition from a Democratic president and a Democratic Congress, can we realistically depend on them?   Sadly, I don’t’ think so.  How can we take this issue to the streets and make our struggle for reproductive justice a priority?  I would love to hear suggestions.

Half the Sky

March 25, 2010

In reading Half the Sky, Nicholas Kristof’s and Sheryl Wudunn’s new book about tragic and empowering stories of women around the world, I am flabbergasted at the level and vast tolerance and perpetuation of violence against women. It takes so many forms, some subtle, some brutal, but all devastating to the physical and emotional status of women and their chances for empowerment. While not always taking the brutal forms that it takes in other parts of the world, such as the way rape is almost a standard protocol in the Eastern Congo, the tolerance of violence against women allows women to be subjugated in many forms here in the United States too. From reproductive rights to the lack of health insurance coverage of women who have been victims of domestic violence, violence against women is seen not just in the unfortunate result of a domestic abuse incident. The violence is seen as an intergenerational seed that propagates the potential for poor health and bad choices for future generations that may not have the resiliency to cope with everyday challenges, thus perpetuating a cycle of violence and self-destruction.

Half the Sky, however, shows what a little effort can do for women in dire straits. A microloan to a woman in east Africa, for example, can tap into the previously untapped will, entrepreneurial spirit, gumption, and tenacity of women who can and do have a major impact in their communities. Expanding access to educational opportunities and capital, we can catalyze a new generation of women who can perpetuate a new cycle of healthy generations to come. The book implies that violent communities stem from unequal communities; unbalanced gender dynamics create instability, war, poverty, injustice and worse. In response, don’t we all out it to ourselves to help establish, even if in small bits, gender equality wherever possible? Don’t we owe it to everyone to help women become healthy, productive participants in our society? In so doing, we create balance; we create equality; we sustain peace in the homes and in our communities.

Making History Takes Time

March 3, 2010

A dear friend and wise woman gave me this sage advice many years ago as I expressed my frustration with how long it is taking to reduce and ultimately end domestic violence.  I often use this as a mantra when I see our reception area fill up on a daily basis.  I have been working with the issue of domestic violence since April 1985.  When I began, it was legal to beat your wife/partner with impunity in over half the states in this country.  It is now illegal in all states.  All states have some form of restraining order system and emergency shelters.  Some might argue that these efforts represent band-aids, not remedies.  I would not disagree.

However, one way to gauge progress is in the public’s tolerance for domestic violence.  This past weekend the New York Times broke a news story about New York Governor David Patterson.  Apparently and allegedly, the governor instructed staff to intervene in a domestic violence case where one of his closest aides allegedly physically abused his girlfriend.  The Governor himself also intervened.  The victim did not present in court some say because of the governor’s intervention on behalf of the perpetrator several times including the night before court.

In December 2009, New York State Senator Hiram Monserrate was convicted of domestic violence after a video found him dragging his girlfriend out of their apartment.  Allegedly, he cut her face with a knife requiring 20 stitches.  Both incidents caused uproars calling for resignations.  Ten years ago, silence would prevail.  Twenty years ago, both abusers would have been told to take a walk around the block and cool off.  The victims would have received lectures from law enforcement instructing them to be better partners.   Both instances demonstrate what we already know, that domestic violence happens in every corner of our society – the rich, poor, middle class; unemployed, blue collar, white collar and yes, even in political circles.

I applaud New York City law enforcement for their diligence in arresting the senator.  I also commend the informant at the New York Times regarding the Governor’s involvement in the cover up.  Maybe, the “good ole boys systems” that collude with batterers and hide these heinous crimes is dissolving.  Maybe domestic violence is newsworthy.  Maybe the systems put in place a couple of decades ago worked–two careers may be lost as consequences of their involvement in domestic violence incidents.

Granted, I’m not naïve.  Political opportunists will use any tool to unseat their opponent.  They may even go home and hurt their own partner after giving a searing and public rebuke of the offending one’s bad deed.  Somehow, though I will take this as progress.  At least our issue is worth using as a political ping-pong ball.  There was a time in our not-too-distant past where this issue would not have even raised an eyebrow.  Making history does indeed take time but I think we are seeing history in the making.

Justice Prevailed Today

February 22,2010

Today was a good day for justice.  Today was a good day for the Schipsi family, relatives, friends and the Santa Clara community.  It could not have come soon enough.  Fragile hearts were on the line.  Today the judge ruled on whether to allow Bulos (Paul) Zumont to post bail.  He has been charged with the first-degree murder of Jennifer Schipsi, a warm, generous and loving woman whose life was cut down in a violent act.  Today, the prosecutor revealed a small glimpse into the kind of man that is on trial for the murder of Jennifer.

Today we found out that Paul was arrested and convicted of a domestic violence related offense in Washington State in 1994.  While in CA, Paul added another two convictions for domestic violence related crimes against Jennifer.  In fact, he was on probation for domestic violence at the time of Jennifer’s murder.   We also learned that police found the human growth hormone in his home during the search of his property.  By his own admission, Paul was using the drug.  This drug is known to cause aggressive behavior.  Today we were reminded that domestic violence breeds in families.  While on the stand testifying in Paul’s defense, his sister acknowledged being a victim of domestic violence.  I sensed it was something that slipped out.  She blurted it out in the context of domestic violence not being a “big deal”.

I felt great sadness for this woman.  Even at this point in our history, some women and men continue to hold on to the notion that domestic violence is part of life, “no big deal”. It’s a no big deal that robs a person of her soul, her spirit and chips away at her ability to believe in anyone ever again.  It strips a person of trust and joy.  Yet, it’s no big deal.  Some small good could come from this horrible ordeal.  Perhaps Paul’s sister will find that domestic violence is a big deal, that no one should have to live a life in fear of another human being.  It is unacceptable and people who beat up other people in the name of love must be held accountable and face consequences.

Perhaps if when Paul hurt Jennifer the first time, his family would have expressed their disapproval and refused to collude with Paul, perhaps we would not need to sit in this courtroom. If when he turned to them for protection, they would have said, no you must face the consequences.  We will still love you but you must stop this behavior.

Today I witnessed the connection between his family’s tacit approval of his prior bad behavior and his action in court.  While sitting down at the defense table, Paul raised his middle finger in an offensive gesture directed at the mother of the slain victim.  He smirked.  Does Paul believe he will never face consequences; that he can walk through life shredding the lives of others and not pay for his deeds?  Is that what he learned from his family?

If so, today Paul had a rude awakening.  Today the judge denied his bail request.  Today, justice was served and it’s just the beginning.  If you would like to attend hearings and support the Schipsi family, please email me at kkrenek@nextdoor.org.

Is Prostitution a Choice?

February 10, 2010

I am currently reading the book “Half the Sky” by Nicholas D. Kristof and Sheryl WuDunn. In the first few chapters, the authors cover forced prostitution and sex trafficking particularly of very young women.  They frequently note that adult women choose the lifestyle and therefore are not in greatest need of assistance (paraphrased).  First let me state that I really like the book.  It has exceptional stories of women rising from the ashes and using their horrific experience to contribute to the greater good.  On the whole, the book’s stories remind me that we are survivors.  I also agree that childhood sex trafficking is abhorrent.

So you might ask “what is my problem?”  Well, I want to explore the proposition that women choose prostitution.  For some women, prostitution is a choice.  But based on what?  I believe the word choice is a misnomer.  I think it is the result of the mainstream economic system’s deliberate (and successful) maneuvers to keep women from engaging in and benefiting from the established labor force in a meaningful way.

I parallel this to the mainstream economic effort to keep African Americans from participation.  It would seem that we have an entire underground economic system in our country for them that exists primarily as a substitute to achieve economic sufficiency and attain wealth.  It exists because African Americans have been systematically denied access to mainstream industry.

The problem with both alternatives lies in their danger.  Selling drugs, other contraband and prostitution are a means to an end.  These industries mimic “above ground” business in many ways however, except that violence is part and parcel of these industries and embedded in the rules of the game.  Both underground economic systems wear on the psyche and body. Prostitution is dangerous at best.   Incidence of substance abuse and sexually transmitted infection are much higher in the population of prostitutes.  Physical abuse is the norm.  Likewise, our prisons are full of participants of this underground economic system.  In the end, death and imprisonment are the risks of this game.

If the need to maintain this alternative economic system suddenly disappeared and the doors to Wall Street and Main Street opened equitably to accommodate all, would those engaged in dangerous and risky activities choose the alternative systems? So…back to my original question, when we say prostitution is a choice, I ask you, is it really?

A Family’s Agony

January 28, 2010

Last week, Bulos (Paul) Zumont pled not guilty to charges of first degree murder and arson in the murder of Jennifer Schipsi in mid October 2009.   A probation violation charge will be added later.  His probation stems from an earlier conviction on domestic violence.  Next Door Solutions to Domestic Violence provided services to Jennifer and grieve the loss of her life.

In an effort to support Jennifer’s family, our staff and volunteers attend criminal hearings in this matter.  My personal attendance has given me an intimate view of the grief experienced by a family that has lost a loved one to domestic violence.  Often in reading the newspaper about violent deaths, I feel empathy but I go about my business of living, with all the messes and joy life can bring.  This time is different.  I am witnessing the effects of murder.

The criminal justice system is cold and harsh at best.  Comfort for families of murder victims is not the first priority.  Their job is to get to the truth, which often brings ugly revelations.  The prosecutor in this case, Charles Gillingham is top notch.  He is professional and forthcoming. You sense that he knows what he is doing.  Unfortunately, what he has to report is gruesome.  He cannot sugarcoat the truth.

But another truth exists.  This family is in agony.  They look like lost souls not knowing what will happen next to exacerbate their grief.  For the family of a murder victim new, fresh pain comes constantly.  It must be unbearable.  As I watch the prosecutor discuss aspects of the case, I see the pins family members wear.  Jennifer’s smiling face on the pin reminds us that she was not just a murder victim; she was a vibrant, loving and giving person.  The juxtaposition of hearing the grotesque details of her death while looking at the face on the pin is heart wrenching.  Watching the expressions on the faces of family members provide the missing link.

If Zumont is found guilty of murder, another charge should be added to the list of charges against him – theft.  When Paul Zumont killed Jennifer, he stole a piece of her mother, father, aunts and uncles.  He stole a piece from friends and he stole a piece from our community.  No one will be the same, certainly not the family nor friends or even those of us who provide services to victims of domestic violence and their children.

This trial will expose the devastation of domestic violence.  Unfortunately, it won’t be unusual to us.  We see it day after day at Next Door.  Now the community needs to see it as well.  We made a commitment to raise the shades in homes where domestic violence wreaks havoc on people.  We cannot go back and roll them down.  Bringing light to the issue, as difficult as it is, sanitizes the space.  Light helps us to assess the damage and correct it.  Ultimately, we will be a better community for it.

We need your help to bring the light to this case.  We want to pack the courtroom in honor of Jennifer, bear witness to her life and demonstrate support for the family.  We cannot do this alone. Please email me at kkrenek@nextdoor.org if you can help.

Courtroom Drama

January 22, 2010

In the coming months you will be reading many posts authored by me about the murder trial of Jennifer Schipsi.  I will attend many of the hearings and the trial of Bulos (Paul) Zumont, who is charged with murder in the first degree and arson.  Allegedly Zumont killed Jennifer (whom he lived with at the time) and then set fire to the house in Palo Alto.  The court case moved to San Jose from Palo Alto for security reasons and as the trial goes on, I hope to provide you with a glimpse of the good, bad and ugly side of the criminal justice system.

I rarely sit in courtrooms these days.  It is a frustrating experience, however, everyone in our community should observe how the criminal justice system works at least once.  We would be better-informed voters when electing or re-electing judges.  I am indeed discouraged by what I witnessed in the Honorable Douglas Southard’s court in Palo Alto on three occasions.  It was disorganized and unprofessional.  No one seemed to know what he or she was doing.  Judge Southard didn’t have control of the activities nor did he seem to care.  Both time spent on paper work unavailability, and attorneys not presenting themselves in a timely manner waste our taxes.  Judge Southard engaged more in casual conversations with attorneys than getting to the business of running a courtroom.

The Zumont case brought tension and stress to the courtroom.  Supporters on both sides felt distress and anger.  The defendant didn’t help when he walked into the courtroom, still in shackles and gave thumbs up and a wink to his supporters.  It took too long for the judge to act on the defendants inappropriate behaviors.  At the last hearing date in Palo Alto last week, Judge Southard gave what I thought was an offensive and demeaning mini-lecture to those in attendance.  He indicated that people could not come to his courtroom wearing colors and waving banners like a football game.  No one carried a banner and the “colors” were purple ribbons worn unassumingly by Jennifer’s friends and family.  To liken the actions of both Jennifer’s and Zumont supporters to that of fans of football teams trivialized and minimized this case.  Emotions were raw and pain greatly felt, obviously as Jennifer’s mother said in the courtroom: “I just buried my daughter”.  One could expect demonstrations of anger and pain like this when each side must sit inside a small courtroom together.

Judge Southard could have stated that respect for the court system must persist even though the situation was painful for all.  And then, Judge Southard could have heeded the calling himself and conducted business in his court with the sense of decorum and respect that he was asking of others and that this court case and tragedy deserve.

For the latest on the case, click here.

Alviso case highlights domestic violence that is often hidden within gay community

San Jose Mercury News

Published: Janurary 11, 2010

By Julia Prodis Sulek

On a ride home from her McDonald’s job two days before she was killed, Leti Martinez told her cousin that her violent relationship with her girlfriend was over, that she wanted a fresh start.

Despite fistfights, scratches, chokeholds, black eyes and one restraining order during their four-year relationship, Martinez and Jennifer Bautista made up as often as they broke up — a typical pattern in domestic cases, whether gay or straight. And, like the worst of abuse cases, this one ended in tragedy after Bautista allegedly ran over Martinez on Dec. 28.

The case has drawn attention to domestic abuse that is often hidden within the gay community, a group that is trying to put its best foot forward as it fights for equal rights. The problem can be particularly difficult to recognize within the lesbian community because of a lingering perception that “women don’t hurt each other.”

But the percentage of domestic violence cases among gay couples is the same as for straight couples — up to 33 percent, studies show — and abusive relationships in both groups suffer the same power and control issues that can lead to violence.

“This was always seen as a guy thing: Guys do this to gals, or they do it to each other, but women don’t do it to each other,” said Wiggsy Sivertsen professor of counseling services at San Jose State University, who has been involved in domestic violence issues for many years, including training San Jose police officers in how to handle abuse among gay couples.

While the gay community makes strides in gaining acceptance in society, “we’re much like other at-risk communities,” Sivertsen said. “If we expose the dirty laundry in our community, they say, ‘See? Look what those people do to each other.’ There’s a kind of reluctance to put ourselves in a situation to be judged that way.”

Just what Martinez, 20, and Bautista, 19, did to each other over the course of their relationship will likely be a major issue in the case against Bautista, who has been charged with vehicular manslaughter and is being held on $500,000 bail.

Deputy District Attorney Dana Overstreet said she couldn’t discuss the details of the investigation, though she noted “any evidence of domestic violence may become extremely important in this case, regardless of who the aggressor is.”

The only details released about the case so far is that neighbors saw the two women arguing outside Martinez’s Alviso home, then one witness saw Martinez jump on top of the Honda’s hood before Bautista started driving down the street. Bautista stopped twice but then fled. At some point during the nearly three-block ordeal, Martinez was run over.

A restraining order filed by Bautista against Martinez a year ago, and interviews with Martinez’s family, indicate that at various times, the women appeared to be mutual combatants.

Some of the conflict appeared to surround Bautista’s other relationships. In the court document granting a temporary restraining order last January, Bautista hand-wrote, with often poor punctuation and spelling, her allegations against Martinez:

“She come to my house and she started arguing about a guy I’m seeing now. She got jealous and broke my phone. Started hitting me and slapping me chocked me left me bruises, marks,” Bautista wrote. “She was threanting me she was going to ‘kill me’ and that, ‘if she can’t have me no one can.’ ”

Bautista has declined media interviews from jail and her family could not be located for comment. Police are hoping the Bautista family will come forward to speak with investigators as well as turn over the purple Honda that is registered to Bautista’s mother.

Martinez’s family, meanwhile, is outraged that instead of being charged with murder, Bautista has been charged with vehicular manslaughter with gross negligence, which carries a penalty of up to seven years. They say that Martinez would often come home with her face scratched and black eyes.

“Leave her,” Martinez’s mother, Rhoda Vasquez, would tell her. But her daughter would always say, “No, I love her. Mind your own business.”

It’s a refrain heard time and time again in domestic violence cases of all kinds. And for better or worse, Sivertsen said, “we are really not that different from each other.”

At the LGBTQ Youth Space at the Billy DeFrank Center in San Jose, advice pamphlets about “unhealthy and abusive relationships” are available in the hangout room for their clients between the ages of 13 and 25. Of the 45 young people who are taking advantage of the center’s free counseling service, 20 say they are in an abusive relationship, and six of those are women.

“I wish one of these people were referred here,” said Cassie Blume of the Youth Space program, “to get these kids connected rather than have 19- and 20-year-olds dealing with this themselves.”

Fisher: A battered woman’s compelling story

San Jose Mercury News

Published: September 30, 2009

By Patty Fisher

Why didn’t she just leave?

Every time I hear about a battered woman who is shot or beaten to death by her husband or boyfriend, that’s what I wonder.

What was she thinking? How could she let him hit her, night after night — and stay?

I have heard the answers to those questions many times, from the women themselves and from the counselors who tried to help them: She stayed because she had no money and nowhere to go. She was afraid he’d kill her if she left. She didn’t think anyone would believe her story. And, saddest of all, she thought she deserved it.

But in a new book that chronicles in brutal detail the four years of beatings and psychological abuse she suffered at the hands of her handsome, seemingly devoted husband, author Leslie Morgan Steiner offers this simple reason why she stayed.

“I loved him,” she told me. “I just thought he was a really troubled guy.”

Steiner, a successful author who edited the 2006 best-seller “Mommy Wars” about the colict of career moms vs. stay-at-home moms, will be in San Jose Oct. 8 to discuss her new memoir, “Crazy Love,” and to raise money for Next Door Solutions, our largest provider of shelter and other services to victims of domestic violence.

Last year in Santa Clara County, domestic violence hot lines fielded more than 24,000 calls and provided emergency beds to 795 women and children. But nearly 1,100 victims and their children were turned away because there weren’t enough beds.

This year, after Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger cut the state’s entire $16 million domestic violence budget, shelters across California are closing or cutting back on services, making it even harder for women and men to break free from abusive partners. Next Door and three other shelters in Santa Clara County, each took $200,000 hits.

Kathleen Kreneck, executive director of Next Door, hopes to sell enough $50 tickets to the Steiner fundraiser to keep the doors open for at least a few months.

“We’re hoping our community will rally around us and say we want people to be safe here,” she said. “I find it interesting that the governor rallied around the state parks but not domestic violence, when there are victims literally dying across California. That certainly doesn’t speak to my value system.”

Or mine.

Steiner, too, was appalled when she heard about the service cuts in California.

“It’s like a body blow to think that women and children who are so desperate that they reach out for help will not be able to get it,” she said. “The long-term cost for society will be far greater than just the cost of keeping shelters open.”

In some ways, Steiner is not the stereotypical battered woman. She was well educated and independent. She never spent a night in a shelter. Perhaps that’s why “Crazy Love” is such a compelling read. It’s the story of a young Harvard graduate with a dream job at Seventeen magazine in New York City who falls for a 30-something guy she meets on the subway. He’s well dressed, attentive and romantic — until she moves in with him and he starts hitting and choking her.

“I literally could have walked out the door, except for what happened to me psychologically,” she said. She felt compassion because he was beaten as a child and vowed to help him. Meanwhile, he became increasingly controlling and manipulative, taking her away from her job and alienating her from her family.

It wasn’t until he nearly killed her one night that she finally called the cops.

Steiner spent 10 years writing “Crazy Love” and another year agonizing over whether to publish it. It took courage to go public with her story, and thousands of women will read it and see themselves.

On Oct. 8, we’ll all have an opportunity to hear her tell that story in person.

More important, we’ll be able to help keep Next Door’s doors open. Without safe places to go and caring professionals to help them, battered women — and men — will have one more reason not to leave.