By: Kyla Goolsby
Intimate partner violence claims another victim every 24 minutes. Domestic violence occurs cyclically, where a partner manipulates the inequality in a relationship to maintain power and control over their counterpart. The reach of domestic violence is immense – totaling 12 million men and women per year. With the steadfast progression of the COVID-19 pandemic and subsequent stay-at-home orders, courts have had to move proceedings online to comply with social distancing measures. Pertinently, the stay-at-home orders generated a massive spike in domestic violence. A Massachusetts study concluded that nearly all women seeking emergency medical care in the beginning weeks of the pandemic sought treatment for domestic violence-related injuries. Remote proceedings for domestic violence cases have significant benefits and consequences for victims, illustrating the delicate nature of these cases. Where court from the couch decreases fear of face-to-face contact with abusers, the potential of virtual backgrounds exposing the victim’s location also presents lingering unease.
Prior to the pandemic, domestic violence advocates played an integral role in the protection and empowerment of domestic violence victims. Advocates accompany victims to court proceedings, provide safety referrals, and educate victims on the power and control mechanisms abusers mobilize to establish dominance. COVID-19 burglarizes victims of the camaraderie formulated with advocates, leaving them to contemplate the potential safety concerns of remote proceedings alone. It is important to note the escalation of isolation domestic violence victims face because of the pandemic.
Because stalking is a frequent symptom of intimate partner abuse, many victims maintain anonymity in their physical location, keeping their address out of public records. Remote court proceedings mean that the camera is on, the background is visible – the attacker can see into your home. This poses an acute risk of geographical location exposure, putting the life and safety of the victim in jeopardy. Although Zoom offers an artificial background feature, technology may not be updated enough to be compliant, and technology in it of itself is finicky. If the victim is in the custody of children, a visual of the home could pose additional dangers. Among these include the abuser noticing certain aspects of the victim’s space and directing questions at the children. These questions could trick the child into revealing the location. As well, the abuser may use observations about the space to influence custody hearings in their favor, characterizing the environment as unfit for children. Finally, problems have arisen wherein abusers provide the victim with technology to conduct virtual custody visits, fitting the device with spyware to disseminate the victim’s locality. An abuser’s ability to uncover a victim’s location could mean life or death, and remote court proceedings make it easier.
Although posing a serious risk, remote court proceedings also present impactful benefits to victims of domestic violence. Formerly, victims had no choice but to face their abusers in the courtroom, risking further trauma. Abusers and their supporters frequently intimidate victims into abandoning court proceedings, eliciting threats of violence should the victim cooperate with the legal system. Albeit not impossible for a prosecutor to proceed without the victim, their absence significantly complicates the argument. With hearings now taking place via Facetime or Zoom, victims can abandon the fear of direct retaliation in the courtroom. Consequently, there is a greater chance of victims’ full participation in the litigation process, yielding a positive outcome. In addition to streamlining prosecution, remote hearings also assist in the obtaining of personal protection orders. Domestic violence shelters may provide Internet services to victims, partnering with courts to orchestrate personal protection hearings remotely. The same concept applies here – victims are more likely to seek personal protection orders through this avenue due to the physical protection remote access provides. In creating safe spaces to recover personal protection orders, or merely continue their participation in a domestic violence proceeding, the remote hearings stemming from the pandemic positively benefit victims.
Remote court proceedings for domestic violence cases negatively impact victims by providing ample opportunities for abusers to disseminate the victim’s physical location, or manipulate children and custody hearings. In these ways, remote court proceedings are a public health threat for victims of intimate partner violence. Contrastingly, the ability to conduct litigation remotely also encourages the victim to participate, given the negation of face-to-face courtroom threats. To empower victims of domestic violence, advocates must be wary of these benefits and consequences to adjust their approach. Victims need allies. Allies need to be educated. As the world continues socially-distant life, courts and advocates alike must adapt to continue protecting victims.
Student Bio: Kyla Goolsby is a second-year law student at Suffolk University Law School and is pursuing a concentration in Health and Biomedical Law. Kyla is also a staff member for the Journal of High Technology Law, and a health and pharmaceutical law research assistant. Kyla formerly worked as a domestic violence advocate in Lansing, MI.
Disclaimer: The views expressed in this blog are the views of the author alone and do not represent the views of JHTL or Suffolk University Law School.
