"He moves things around in the diaper bag," Elsa M. says and her eyes anxiously shift from the child on her lap to the bag by the door. "Even this scares me. I get scared about little things like that because I don't know what his intentions are, after everything he has done to us." She is referring to her husband, the father of her children, and the violent abuser who has filled years of her life with terror. They separated but share child custody, and each time he takes the kids, she is petrified, to the extent that she questions his motives even when he merely shifts the contents of their youngest child's diaper bag. She describes a recent trip to Wal-Mart where she had the feeling of being watched while walking the aisles. She is almost certain a pick-up truck followed her car out of the parking lot.
In many respects, Elsa's experience mirrors that of millions of American women caught in abusive relationships. The subtle manipulations and outright threats of her abuser echo words by women of varied backgrounds in any number of domestic violence shelters. But Elsa's abuser had an additional tool for trapping her in a cycle of violence. He held the ultimate trump card: he was a U.S. citizen and Elsa, born in Mexico, lacked authorization to live in the U.S.
As the clock winds down on the 112th Congress, the House and Senate are in a standoff over renewing the Violence Against Women Act -- the single most important federal law addressing domestic and sexual violence.
The most intense debate has focused on protections for immigrant victims of violence developed over the law's 18-year history. A bi-partisan bill approved overwhelmingly by the Senate proposes modest adjustments to make the protections against abuse for immigrant women more accessible. A counterproposal passed by the House would undermine existing protections.
Globally, more than 100 million women live outside the country of their birth, more than double the number in 1960. Migrant women face additional barriers to accessing justice for violence committed against them, including lack of awareness about local laws and procedures, language and cultural differences, geographic isolation from authorities and services (for example withmigrant farmworkers), fear of retaliation against family members in their home countries, and discrimination by law enforcement authorities. For migrant women who lack authorization to live and work in their country of residence, the possibility of deportation can be manipulated by abusers to trap them in violent relationships and ensure their silence.
"He had total control over me," Elsa says.
When the abuse hit a new high during her last pregnancy and Elsa finally called the police, her husband received a citation and spent one night in jail. Bent on revenge, he made good on his longstanding threat to turn her in to immigration authorities if she reported the domestic violence. Sitting in her sister's apartment in Nogales, Arizona, Elsa and I were no more than a mile from the border with Mexico. She expected to soon face deportation and separation from her four U.S.-born children.
American immigration policy was not crafted with the intention for it to become an enabler of violence against women like Elsa, but there is little doubt that it often serves that function. The government estimates that 11.5 million people currently live in the U.S. without authorization and about 47 percent, or 5.4 million, are women. These women possess the same human rights as anyone else -- in particular the right to freedom from violence, and equality before the law.
For almost two decades, women's rights advocates have pushed policymakers to ensure that women are not forced to choose between being beaten up or being deported. In the landmarkViolence Against Women Act of 1994, Congress created a process by which battered spouses of U.S. citizens and legal permanent residents could apply for permanent residency without the approval of their abusive spouses. Then in 2000, Congress established two visas that provide a path to permanent residency for migrants who assist in the investigation or prosecution of criminal activity: the T-visa for trafficking victims and the U-visa for victims of crime, including domestic violence and sexual assault.
Not every woman who has experienced abuse meets the eligibility criteria. U-visas, which only became available in 2008 after years of delays in developing the regulations, are capped at 10,000per year though they cover a wide range of crime victims. To be eligible, a victim must have a certification from law enforcement indicating her cooperation with the investigation or prosecution. Further, limited awareness of the mechanism among both victims and law enforcement officers is a problem that, while slowly being addressed, severely undermines the visa's impact.
The VAWA renewal bill approved by the House proposes sweeping changes to the existing legal protections for immigrant victims of sexual and domestic violence. Among other harmful provisions, the bill would change the requirements for applications for immigration relief for abused immigrant spouses of U.S. citizens and permanent residents.
These changes include allowing government adjudicators to receive information from an accused abuser about the spouse's immigration application. The House bill also undermines the U-visa program, by changing the law to allow only a small subsection of crime victims the opportunity to adjust to permanent residency status after their temporary visa expires. This puts women back in the position of having to choose between enduring abuse or facing deportation.
Elsa's vindictive husband could not so effectively have kept his wife in an abusive relationship without U.S. immigration policy. The good news is that after years of suffering, Elsa was ultimately granted permission to stay in the U.S. through the Violence Against Women Act.
Members of Congress should remember Elsa's case, and not roll back protections for immigrant women.
Meghan Rhoad is a women's right researcher at Human Rights Watch, specializing in violence against women and the U.S. immigration system. This piece draws on her chapter for The Unfinished Revolution.
This post is part of the HuffPost Shadow Conventions 2012, a series spotlighting three issues that are not being discussed at the national GOP and Democratic conventions: The Drug War, Poverty in America, and Money in Politics.
HuffPost Live will be taking a comprehensive look at the corrupting influence of money on our politics August 29th and September 5th from 12-4 pm ET and 6-10 pm ET. Click here to check it out -- and join the conversation.
1.These women may not have a chance to leave, they arekept from having friends, and are not allowed to speak with family.
2. For most abused women leaving is the most dangerous times, it easily leads to their murder and sometimes they feel its safer for them to stay, even in its against the law.
3 These offenders also know where their families live and say they will kill them if they leave.
4.It takes an average of 7 times for a woman to leave her abuser.
5. They dont want to lose their kids, so they stay.
These are just a few reasons for the women in abuse to stay, mostly even though the offender hurts them they still love them, its not right but its part of self-esteem and lonleness. I hope this teaches someone, and maybe we can show some sympathy towards these victims.
http://dontmarry.wordpress.com/vawa-abuse/
And if in the situation of being abused...you must flee again. After all, you have broken the security laws of immigration (especially in a time of security measures for terrorism).
If this law does not include those conditions...then the whole thing should be canceled for bold faced hypocrisy!!
Let's make it simple. In this country, no person should be subject to violence by another. If one is violent, they SHOULD be held responsible for their actions no matter how or WHERE they were born. You should not get a free pass into the country by claiming violence (imagine that can of worms), but we will hold anyone who is violent to you responsible for their actions. If you are here illegally, you may also be deported, but the one causing violence does not get away with their actions.
I know I've seen the commercials...The current government is apparently ONLY concerned about the type of violence they can sell. :-(
I can certainly see where "all violence" may have been too inclusive. But seriously...I'm talking about the country-wide reality, where personal violence needs to be addressed at every level...instead of just screaming about the marketable ones in an election year.
What a Christian party you are.
The best choice for an abused undocumented women is to leave. She lives under the radar and she can stay there.
I don't mean to be callous and I support the push for amnesty but understand that if you are in the country illegally then the risk of being deported comes with staying in the US illegally. If they had the courage to pick up and move to another country they should be able to move to another state to leave their abuser.
Considering they are undocumented and don't live under their won names staying under the radar should already be second nature. Why can't we expect women to take care of themselves in this respect if they already managed to evade the law thus far? I would support a visa program for serious crimes but not for: "The subtle manipulations and outright threats of her abuser echo words by women of varied backgrounds in any number of domestic violence shelters."
We don't need to grant amnesty for women who happen to be in lousy relationships, those women need to move on.
Other than that VAWA has lead to all sorts of abuse against men who are often falsely accused of violence. It also disregards the reality of women abusing men. The law was sexist from the start and should be scrapped and remade to reflect the non gendered reality of domestic violence.
What are you TALKING about?