API Innovative Strategies:  Emerging Themes

Several issues regarding domestic violence intervention arose in these discussions with longtime activists, service providers and advocates in the API domestic violence movement.  Work within API communities has led intentionally or not towards alternative "ways of thinking" and "ways of doing."

Are these "innovations," "alternatives," the natural responses of grassroots approaches perhaps akin to an earlier phase of the movement of the U.S. anti-violence movement, or hybrid responses resulting from necessary accommodations between different contradictory systems?

Distinctions between intervention versus prevention, individual and community, survivor and abuser blur and overlap.  As we know, domestic violence touches us on all levels in many complex ways.

This section groups emerging issues and themes in the following manner:

• Redefining the Problem
• Redefining the Vision
• Meeting Diverse Needs:  Variations on a pan-Asian Model
• Interventions for Survivors
• Interventions for Abusers
• Staying in the Community
• Limitations of API Intervention Strategies

Redefining the Problem

Many agreed that the very concept of domestic violence needs reevaluation.  While the larger anti-violence movement has struggled with moving from the notion of physical violence to other dimensions including emotional, financial, sexual and other components of what has popularly become known as the "Power and Control Wheel," women of color have also insisted on broadening the context of power and control from the individual relationship and the power dimension of patriarchy to include systems of racism, anti-immigration, homophobia, and so on.

For API women in particular, anti-immigrant legislation has had a profound impact on opportunities for U.S. citizen or permanent resident spouses to control and abuse immigrant wives.[11] In addition, U.S. military presence in Asia has contributed to the creation of geopolitical, economic, and sexually exploitative conditions which have complex implications for API women and their communities.  U.S. military policy has had further impact on the flow of API immigration to the U.S.  Many API immigrants are in the U.S. as a direct or indirect result of these policies and actions thus further influencing trauma prior to immigration, conditions during transit, and conditions within immigrant families and communities in the U.S.

I would say that overall the problem [with the existing models has been that it has been so focused on interpersonal violence.  Our work hasn't been looked at in a broader framework, for example, looking at issues of poverty - looking at issues of race - so that strategies have not been so helpful, particularly to communities of color.  (Director, pan-Asian shelter)

Even within the context of API families, domestic violence often involves dynamics beyond the "intimate relationship."  While extended family networks may serve as important positive resources for survivors of domestic violence, they can also actively participate in abuse.  Within some families or cultures, complex extended family structures such as expected living arrangements, familial roles, dowry or bride price patterns, clan leader roles and so on can significantly define patterns of abuse as well as potential resources for the resistance of abuse.

Noting the struggles of women in Asia, one long-time advocate looks to rural India for an alternative conceptualization of domestic violence.

What does domestic violence look like [for API women]?  It looks so different in all these groups.  The cycle of violence just doesn't apply.  We haven't stopped to ask, "Does it apply all women?"  A group of abused women in rural India has come up with an image of a "coiled spring."  Each coil represents one cycle or episode of violence.  Each time the woman leaves the marital home to seek refuge in her natal home, the latter becomes less welcoming and even abusive.  So when she returns to her marital home, she gets re-abused with greater impunity.  Each time she goes back and returns, the coil gets tighter and tighter, eventually leading to her "subjugation or death."  (Director, ethnic specific agency)

Redefining the Vision

What then is our vision of intervention?  Is it removing the survivor and her children from the home?  Is it reducing violence within an abusive family?  Is it removing the abuser or "fixing" the abuser?  Is it preventing violence in the first place?

While this report reveals no clear consensus with regard to a vision of domestic violence intervention, some possibilities emerged from conversations with these API advocates and activists.

Our goal is minimizing violence [or] increasing safety.  I've been asked, "Are we shortchanging the women?  Are we shortchanging ourselves?  Are we minimizing our goals because we're just talking about ending physical abuse and not the emotional and psychological and financial abuse?"   Minimizing the physical abuse [may be] the best case scenario and better than independence and having her own subsidized Section 8 apartment unless she could speak English fluently and get gainful employment.  Putting her in that situation could be more abusive for her.  (Program coordinator, pan-Asian shelter)

I think that part of the key to figuring out how to not be focused on straight middle class women is having a multi-issue analysis which includes issues of economic justice, environmental justice, more liberated ideas around sexual identity and gender identity and also a strong anti-white supremacist and anti-imperialist analysis.  (Advocate, pan-Asian agency)

The goals should be self-sufficiency, both economically as well as emotionally.  (Board member, ethnic-specific agency)

 We need a "harm reduction" model.  (Advocate, ethnic-specific agency)

Meeting Diverse Needs:  Variations on a Pan-Asian Model

Domestic violence intervention programs targeting API communities in the U.S. have arisen in a variety of formations.  While the experiences of these 10 interviewees do not include all categories of domestic violence programmatic response to API communities, their programs reflect a range of organizational responses.  These include but are not limited to the following:

1. API individual within broader domestic violence organization;
2. Domestic violence specialist within broader single ethnic-specific or pan-ethnic agency;
3. Ethnic-specific domestic violence agency;
4. Domestic violence collaboration among ethnic-specific and/or pan-Asian agencies;
5. Domestic violence pan-Asian program sponsored by collaboration of ethnic-specific and/or pan-Asian or immigrant agencies; and
6. Pan-Asian domestic violence agency working collaboratively with various agency partners.

Interventions for Survivors

We have seen that the standard definitions of intervention fall short in API communities.  Reliance on shelters or interventions simply based upon women and children leaving abusive relationships do not work or do not work well enough for women in API communities.  Again, one could question how effective they are for non-API communities.

Most would agree that standardized intervention strategies such as shelter are still necessary.  Over the past 20 years, API-specific shelter and other domestic violence service projects have emerged across the U.S.  Language accessibility and cultural competence have been incorporated into these programs[12].  What other types of innovations have marked some of these programs?

Moving Shelter from the Center

Since the establishment of the first pan-Asian shelter, New York Asian Women's Center in 1982, a handful of pan-Asian, pan-immigrant and ethnic-specific shelter programs[13]  have developed throughout the U.S.  Many of the women interviewed were actively involved in the founding of these programs.

Shelter philosophies, scope of services, collaborative relationships with other programs, and other characteristics vary widely.  The following themes emerged from the interviewees.

While shelters are viewed as a necessary component of intervention strategies, they should be regarded as an option, not as the central one.

This is something that has been very hard to explain to the mainstream and very hard, in particular, to explain to funders, that is, the shelter is probably the smaller part of the intervention services.  There [are] non-residential services or community-based services.  (Program coordinator, pan-Asian shelter)

Domestic violence interventions expanded beyond simple shelter or what may be more typical advocacy services such as support groups, legal advocacy and so on.  Some API programs view themselves as an alternative or complement to shelter programs. 

Our agency doesn't have just one service in the house.  We use existing resources to serve women.  Because it doesn't have all its services in-house, it doesn't need its own shelters or attorneys on staff.  It's not driven to one particular solution.  Case management is decentralized which works because women's needs are complex.  It allows us to take care of these needs in some serial fashion.  She can call at any time.  And you can deal with one thing at a time.  And it can be long term.  The problem with the shelter model is that [services] end after she leaves.  (Director, ethnic-specific agency)

There's a lot of things we help connect them with.  Usually we connect them to all the resources like, "You need ESL," or "You need these disability [resources.]"  We really have to go beyond domestic violence, really looking at their needs, their kid's needs and to make sure that we're not going to put them in jeopardy.  (Advocate, ethnic-specific agency)

Many API programs have created interventions which reach into communities and even into women's homes.  Interviewees noted various strategies which would increase accessibility to API survivors remaining in abusive relationships such as driving lessons, parenting classes (one offers classes to both the survivor and the abuser), and micro-credit programs.

Generalization versus Specialization

Many brought up the issue of compartmentalization of services referring to the tendency of programs to create specialized areas of expertise such as the legal advocate versus the housing specialist and so on.  Some advocates noted the necessity of being a specialist in a particular language and/or culture, but a generalist in terms of information and resources.

What was different with the [pan-Asian shelter] compared to how the mainstream divided the work was that by necessity, a lot of organizations serving linguistic minority groups [are] arranged according to linguistic expertise rather than by any area of work specialization.  So the Korean advocate, the Chinese advocates, they were generalists in domestic violence work, but they were specialists in their community which is something that the mainstream tends not to do.  They knew a little bit about everything, but their job was to go and investigate and to help gain access to these resources.  (Advocate, pan-Asian shelter)

Time and Resources:  Family-Style

Others interpreted boundaries as the extent to which one offers assistance.  One way in which some API programs differ is in the amount of time services extend to survivors of domestic violence, both in terms of amount of time spent each step of the way as well as the total length of time programs expected to work with particular survivors.

I think that community based organizations are more creative in reaching out because they have to.  So if a woman needs to go to court, [mainstream programs] will either have a court advocate, or they'll say, "You do that on your own."  I think that there's a lot more of an understanding amongst community based programs that those are real tough barriers for women, and there needs to be much more support built into that.  There's a lot more handholding - a lot more advocacy than those other programs.  (Director, pan-Asian shelter)

What we've been doing from the get-go that really works is that we're there for the clients, for the victims.  We pretty much do it  "family-style."  We pretty much make them feel at home.  [Our] approach is different. It really varies.  We don't have a standard basic approach.  We have basic guidelines like safety.  But pretty much everybody does it differently based upon the situation.  And a lot of time, it's just to be there for them, just to show that you care, just to listen to them.  A lot of time it helps.  We've had clients who've been with us 3 or 4 years.  And they're still in the situation.  And finally after 3 years, she decided to leave.  But we're there, and she calls.  We will be on the phone for 2 hours, and it's okay.  (Advocate, pan-Asian agency)

Although most agreed that time flexibility is important in working with API survivors, there was some disagreement over freer distribution of resources.  Greater flexibility around resource distribution characterizes many API programs.

At the [mainstream] shelter, we kind of mete out resources.  A woman gets so much food every month or so much monetary support or whatever.  At [our refugee program,] our goal is to get as many resources as we could to women as fast as we could.  I think that was because at a mainstream program, there's a suspicion of people living in poverty - that they take advantage of resources.  I think that in the [refugee program], we know that poverty is not a crime and that people should have what they need.  (Advocate, pan-refugee agency)

However, at least one advocate noted that freer distribution of resources can become problematic.  When does this contradict the notion of empowerment?  Does this lead to additional rules and regulations regarding the distribution of these resources?

What we have been trying to do is to give [survivors] access - to show them how to access things so that they can become independent.  But there is consistently a clash with providing because as soon as you say you have to provide this, then you have to have a set of policies to guide that.  And then you start creating rules for rules.  (Board member, ethnic-specific agency)

Boundaries:  Worker/Client Relationship

Boundaries also describe the relationships existing between client or survivor and worker.  Interpretations of this relationship fell into 3 categories:

1. Pre-existing relationships
2. Personal disclosure
3. Social boundaries

Because workers in API agencies often come from within ethnic or other culturally defined communities and because these communities are generally small, workers often know community members seeking assistance.  These pre-existing relationships have multiple influences on worker/client relationships.  Issues of confidentiality, conflict of interest and worker safety, issues of particular importance within domestic violence work, can be easily compromised in these situations.  As a result, API programs have developed guidelines, casual or formal, regarding these situations.  Rotation of workers and the intentional hiring of more than one worker within a particular ethnic or other group are often adopted as policies.

Boundaries with regard to personal disclosure are fairly flexible within the domestic violence movement in general.  The history of survivors as founders of the movement has challenged more traditional social service notions of worker and client boundaries.  In recent years, professionalization within the movement has moved these boundaries towards more formal, traditional definitions.

API programs appear to vary widely in terms of their stance with regard to these types of boundaries.  Perhaps because many have been established after increasing professionalization of the movement, notions of privacy or perhaps unresolved internalization of shame with regard to personal disclosure, program responses to the question of appropriateness of personal disclosure appear to be remain varied and relatively undefined.

Respondents who have grappled with this question appear to have adopted positions promoting relatively open boundaries with regard to personal disclosure.

I think there was a more holistic approach.  We were clear that it wasn't good for us to create overly dependent relationships with the women that we worked with, but to try to be real and honest about who we were.  The women would regularly ask me, "Are you married?"  "Where did you come from?"  "Have you ever been through a situation like this?"  And I would just answer them as honestly as I could because they were really wanting to relate to me as a woman and not as a worker.  And I never wanted them to feel like they were in a space where they were just another number.  (Advocate, pan-Asian agency)

[If] we are asking people to disclose parts of their private life and we're saying, "Okay, we have none of those things happening to us,"  why should they want to talk to us?  I know a lot of times, women say, "Divorce, how can you do that?  Indian women don't get divorced."  And [I say], "Who are you talking to?  I'm divorced.  I was divorced 20 years ago."  So [they say], "Oh, you can have a life after that?"  And I say, "Yeah.  Sure you can."  I think a lot of people think those are pieces of information that you don't disclose.  Whereas I think it helps you establish yourself in the same sort of human context that she's finding herself in.  (Board member, ethnic-specific agency)

Another area regarding worker/client boundaries is with regard to social boundaries including socializing outside of the work context and the exchange of meals or gifts.  Many API agencies have adopted policies similar to those within mainstream domestic violence agencies, i.e., policies which tend to prohibit exchanges on this level.  Many also noted that while such policies may exist, they are regularly violated resulting in secrecy and feelings of guilt among workers.

Some advocates noted policy decisions which modify or defy such boundaries.  For example, respondents noted that in their programs non-monetary gifts or meals are accepted, but some kind of reciprocity follows to equalize the exchange.

The issue of social boundaries such as the giving of telephone numbers and the formation of personal relationships outside of work appeared to be more comfortably adhered to by API programs.  However, this was not always the case.  As one director of an agency notes:

There are clients that we form friendships with and become part of our social group.  Because we're a volunteer based organization, some of the individuals come in through volunteering or they may get services and also volunteer in different areas.  Through volunteering, it does become more of a social atmosphere.  So you have access to more social interaction.  And you can't alienate somebody.  Because I think one of the things we want to keep in mind is not making someone feel like they have to be treated differently because of what they experienced.  And I think one thing we don't want to do is isolate somebody because they are a survivor and not let them become part of the social interactions they would normally be a part of.  (Director, ethnic-specific agency)

Boundaries:  Personal Safety

Boundaries regarding personal safety such as entering the home of a survivor who is still living with the abuser or entering a home in order to assist a survivor in her escape seem to be regularly challenged by API domestic violence programs.  Respondents related program practices which insist on caution but not necessarily prohibition of such practices.

Recently we went to a woman's home, and we were doing a home visit with her.  The husband was asking about jobs. The husband would come and ask me questions, and that gave me access to spend more time with the women because they knew I was an employment specialist.  They didn't know I was a battered women's employment specialist.  (Director, ethnic-specific agency)

We [went to the home of the women who were abused] regularly because that was the only way we could see them.  So sometimes if women weren't allowed to leave their homes, we would pose as social service providers from another agency and say we were there to talk to them about food stamps.  (Advocate, pan-refugee agency)

Interventions for Abusers

As already stated, respondents were strongly dissatisfied with the criminal legal system as an effective intervention for abusers within the API community.  However, unlike shelters which were still seen as having a legitimate and important role within the range of intervention options for women, the criminal legal system was viewed with varying degrees of support.

For some, the oppressive role of the criminal legal system within API communities, in particular, in light of its increasingly collaborative relationship with the INS marks it as harmful in its impact on API survivors.  Others noted its limited effectiveness as a threat to abusers even if its actual impact once one enters the criminal legal system may be more problematic.  These responses were already noted in the previous section, The Critique:  API Response to the Standard Model of Domestic Violence Intervention.

All respondents strongly stated the need for what was often called "community accountability," that is, interventions generally outside of the criminal legal system which are located within the community. 

What does community accountability look like?  Several examples described a range of community responses.  Throughout these interviews, "community" was conceptualized as community-based domestic violence programs, extended family networks, clan networks, survivor-based groups, faith-based groups, and broader non-institutional community responses.  Some were spontaneous, and some were structured programmatic responses.  Often, community-based domestic violence programs took the lead on organizing collaborative strategies which incorporated various levels of community.

Community Accountability:  Community-Based Batterer Treatment Alternatives

An example of community-based domestic violence programs include more traditional batterer groups which are conducted specifically for API abusers or for a particular ethnic group in the language of that ethnic group. While the effectiveness of batterer groups even if they specifically target API communities was questioned, several ethnic-specific groups have emerged in the past few years.

Other examples combine these more traditional batterer programs with complementary programs which address both the survivor and the abuser in a unified intervention strategy.

One thing we did do was something that I very closely supervised, and it was on a case by case basis.  There's a local batterer intervention program that we had partnered [with] to help them start up batterer intervention programs for Asian men.  What we had done was to send out an advocate along with a batterer intervention counselor to do home visits.  The batterer intervention counselor who was a man would talk to the batterer.  And then the advocate would talk to the woman survivor, both reinforcing the same message.  And they would both go back weekly so the messages weren't just dropped like, "Oh, wrong!  Don't do that!"   (Program Coordinator, pan-Asian shelter)

In another example, abuser intervention combined the faith-based community, batterer and survivor intervention programs and a parenting program which brought together the survivor and abuser as parents.

One of the things that I've done in the Samoan community, it really works.  We have a husband and wife that is in the [domestic violence] situation.  In the Samoan community, they look up to the pastor.  The pastor actually has power.  And if there is any problem in the marital thing, they always go to the pastor.  I work with the pastor and the wife.  So they bring them to the parenting class.  We talk about domestic violence, everything.  The guy actually goes to the batterer's treatment, and the woman comes to us so we provide them support.  And at the same time, they go to the parenting class.  And we don't just talk about domestic violence.  We talk about all kinds of stuff, discipline, communication with the kids, better relationships, all kinds of things.  (Advocate, pan-Asian agency)

Community Accountability:  Community Monitoring of Abusers

Another example of faith-based support of community accountability is a faith-based volunteer program which actually places church members to temporarily live in abusive homes as monitors.

One program is a church-based program.  Instead of shelter, there's this whole huge church of potential volunteers who go out and stay in a woman's home until she feels safe.  So they have this one [Asian] family that they're working with - very dangerous - the woman has a restraining order.  The abuser was actually put in jail for awhile.  But he got out.  All the shelters are full, and she has a lot of children.  So they arranged for the church volunteers to come, and two people come and stay with the family.  (Program Coordinator, pan-Asian shelter)

Community organizing efforts to provide safe community spaces by confronting and restricting abusers were noted.  This acknowledges the limitations of API women to simply leave the community as well as the necessity to change the notion of safe space beyond that of shelter to include broader community spaces.

In these interviews, some examples of community attempts to enforce such strategies appeared in API queer communities. 

There should be much more partnering with community sanctions like he can't go to certain things.  They're developing this with lesbian battering.  "You can't come to this dance or to this concert."  (Advocate, ethnic-specific agency)

Others noted the need for such strategies in all communities.

These big shots are always there at these different festivals.  Why can't we bar them for awhile?  I mean, we bar women.  Women can't come to any of those things because it would be like, "Oh, my God, here he comes."  Nobody's saying that of him.  He comes and goes as he pleases.  (Board member, ethnic-specific agency)

Community Accountability:  Shame-Based Strategies

Many expressed alarm at the tendency of the community to condemn women when their abusers suffer serious consequences for their violence.  Such consequences range from divorce and loss of child custody to incarceration to  physical assaults by women acting in self-defense.  They stressed the need for shame-based strategies which publicly target perpetrators  of violence rather than the victims.

We can use the concept of shame, relieving the survivor of shame and moving on to spotlight the batterer with shame.  (Program Coordinator, pan-Asian shelter)

Some addressed attempts by community-based programs to acknowledge and support extended family and larger community efforts to confront abuse.

We want to do much more with the family - the kids, the guy, the battered woman.  If she doesn't want it done, that's okay.  That doesn't fit our usual way of asking her to not talk to him or him talk to her.  We also want to involve the elders.  You have to be accountable to her, her elders, everyone in the community.  You have to look them right in the eye.  It's a whole shaming technique. 

We're exploring this in our own domestic violence program - public amends.  They would say in front of everybody.  He would invite his people to come to the closing ceremony.  And he would say to the family, the counselors, all the people who came - everyone would hear, "I'm not going to do this anymore."  He would say this in front of everyone.  (Counselor, ethnic-specific program)

Some pointed to community tactics to publicly condemn known abusers.  Such tactics include pickets at businesses owned by abusers and public exposure in the media.

Community Accountability:  Community Sanctions

In some communities, domestic violence advocates are working towards a creative negotiation of already existing clan or village authority structures which can exercise sanctions against domestic violence.  While the U.S. criminal legal system has in many ways undermined these structures, possibilities for redefinition of and re-legitimizing of these systems is being explored.

Traditionally, if a person beats up their wife, then the village leader or families would settle it.  If the man is found guilty, he would have to pay a hefty fine to the family.  That is no longer practiced because that system is no longer valued here where clan leaders say something, but if you go to the courts, the courts say something else.  It totally takes their leadership away.

I think it works when there's a balance of the traditional mechanisms of family safety and leadership involvement.  So when there is the traditional mechanism in place where the husband is disciplined for his behaviors and fined, and there's some accountability for the whole family, then there's some safety net for her. (Advocate, ethnic-specific agency)

Others mentioned more spontaneous responses involving verbal or physical confrontation by family or community supporters of the survivor.

One [example] was where women were meeting in a support group.  One of the women was beaten badly and ended up in the hospital.  The women went to visit the home, tied him up in a chair and slapped him for hours.  It never happened again.  (Program Coordinator, pan-Asian shelter)

Staying in the Community

The notion of "community" pervades the responses of these long-time API domestic violence advocates and activists.  Community connotes places of comfort, of entrapment, of nostalgia and of escape. 

The "community" is also used to describe the location where one educates, raises or transforms awareness, does outreach, organizes and places accountability.  Work in the community, however defined, characterizes many API domestic violence interventions.

It's a key thing that distinguishes services for the Asian community - that the prevention piece is tied in and that it's community-based.  (Advocate, pan-Asian shelter)

Some examples of community-based interventions such as the creation of domestic violence organizations within specific communities, interventions for survivors which reach not only into communities but into survivor's homes, and community accountability for abusers have already been described.

Another area of activity, community organizing, was also frequently mentioned by respondents.  While the distinction between community outreach, community education and organizing is not always clear, many API programs regularly engage community individuals, leaders, organizations and media as a central part of their work.

Respondents referred to domestic violence outreach to ethnic-based festivals, ESL classes, community breakfasts for leaders, door-knocking, community-based conferences and other activities.  These efforts increase accessibility to survivors in the community, increase education and awareness on domestic violence, and, in some cases, promote the participation of community members both in prevention and intervention.

An example of the latter was given by a participant who describes herself as a "community organizer."

We have a "natural helper" concept.  It is actually the backbone of this organization.  We train volunteers in the community to become our eyes and ears.  So they have a basic understanding of domestic violence.  And they become our liaison.  (Advocate, pan-Asian agency)

Limitations of API Intervention Strategies

Are Community-Based Agencies Part of the Problem?

Ironically, some respondents viewed community-based organizations as having a hand in the movement away from community accessibility and responsibility.

I feel a bit like what has happened now is that we've created this layer that the services provide - that the community-based organizations that we have built makes us then one step removed from the community.  It's created an additional layer, and in some ways it's taking power away from the community in dealing with the problem.  So now we say, "Oh yeah.  Domestic violence -- we now recognize that as a problem.  30 years ago we didn't.  That group over there.  Go talk to them about this."  And so it becomes the responsibility of this group to take care of that problem.  And the community itself feels like it's no longer responsible for that problem - no longer has power to change that problem.  (Advocate, pan-Asian shelter)

Institutionalization of API Domestic Violence Programs

LIkewise, institutionalization of API domestic violence programs have resulted in standardization, bureaucracy, professionalization and some of the bias which can characterize mainstream intervention strategies.

I don't think that in the domestic violence field, there's much room for alternative ideas or programs.  I think even in my own agency, one didn't really question what was handed down to us - the definition of abuse, or definition of domestic violence and what intervention programs are acceptable or desired.  You know things are pretty well structured now.  And I don't think there's really much room for questions.  (Attorney, pan-Asian agency)

I'd really like to see class and sexuality and sexual orientation as issues brought into the center of the analysis of how we work with each other as women.  And I feel like classism and homophobia are very deeply engrained in our work right now and impact our strategy and the way we treat each other, and the way we build organizations and institutions.  I think that very few organizations have demonstrated a commitment to being overtly anti-classist and anti-homophobic in their practice and not just in their theories.  (Advocate, ethnic-specific agency)

We have so many rules.  We're very judgmental and controlling about the women.  (Advocate, ethnic-specific agency)

From Organizing to Service-Delivery

Some lamented that programs which once engaged the community have succumbed to a service-delivery model.

What I think is flawed is the whole premise that we can stop domestic violence by creating services for women.  That's only the beginning.  We're at a different historic point.  What we've seen is that in creating a wonderful system, we still haven't stopped male violence.  Now our project needs to go there as well - creating different conditions, where violence isn't so much part of the response. This doesn't mean just making batterers go to  batterer's programs.  It's a larger project - ending violence.  (Director, ethnic-specific agency)

I sometimes get frustrated that when we did the work initially, we did the community organizing.  We were there in almost all of the community events whether they wanted us to be there or not.  We showed up.  But there's no community work that's going on now.  The community knows about us because of the work that came in the early years that we did.  (Board member, ethnic-specific agency)

The Limitations of a Domestic Violence Focus

Furthermore, some questioned the transformative power of what may be viewed as the successes of community education and awareness on domestic violence.

When you talk to people and somebody is divorced, previously they would say, "Oh, my God.  You were divorced."  It's like you're not just a pariah coming in, but a community pariah - like you're going to infect everybody.  It's very interesting because now what I have seen happening is that people say, "Oh, you're divorced.  It must be why you're doing this kind of [work]."  So now we've come to a point where people accept that battering is an okay reason for a divorce.  Then I would say that community education has been unsuccessful because it wasn't linked to violence against women generally.  We cannot talk to the community about incest.  We cannot talk about rape and sexual assault.  We cannot talk in our community about women who kill their partners.  We cannot talk about sexual harassment.  You're really talking about patriarchy and misogyny - not about domestic violence.  I think the way that people are beginning to see it and understand it is -- it's a few aberrant men.  So even when you talk about community organizing and community sanctions, you're talking about a few aberrant men, not about fundamentally changing the way we look at gender relationships.  And that's the harder task.  (Board member, ethnic-specific agency)

Children:  Still Invisible

The relative absence of children in respondent discussions is perhaps a reflection of the continuing invisibility of children in domestic violence intervention.  As children are clearly victims and survivors in domestic violence households, make up a significant portion of shelter residents and often attempt their own courageous interventions to stop abuse, intervention strategies must clearly involve children.

Addressing Men in the Community

While respondents clearly supported a woman-centered intervention approach, the issue of addressing men's violent behavior was noted.

Men have to be included and not just thrown in the criminal justice system.  (Advocate, pan-Asian agency)

Summary of API Innovative Strategies:  Emerging Themes

Discussions with respondents revealed some emerging themes with regard to domestic violence interventions.

Redefining the Problem

Definitions of domestic violence were not the original topic of discussion, but frustrations with existing definitions and the search for conceptualizations of domestic violence, the scope of violence and the relational dynamics which better describe API communities emerged in many interviews.  Although no clear patterns or conclusions could be drawn from this report, this is an area which appears to have an impact on domestic violence interventions and should be explored further.

Redefining the Vision

The breadth of domestic violence advocacy and activism influenced the goals and practices of intervention.  Our answers to the usual soul-searching questions are broader.  What is it that we are trying to do?  What is our focus?  To what end?  These underlying questions merit serious reevaluation and reassessment in order to ensure that appropriate and effective interventions are developed.

Meeting Diverse Needs:  Variations on a Pan-Asian Model

API communities in the U.S. are unique in their ethnic, cultural and language diversity.  The need to address such wide diversity was handled in many different ways.  Creative measures to meet broad and diverse needs with limited resources could also be considered innovative approaches to interventions.

Interventions for Survivors

Intervention practices including location of services/interventions, content of interventions, target populations and so on brought up areas of innovation in working with API survivors.  What might also be called "cultural" approaches to intervention including redefining issues of boundaries, compartmentalization, and professionalization lead to areas of innovation.

Interventions for Abusers

Discussion of interventions for abusers brought up an array of possible approaches, some actually attempted, some planned and some simply speculative, with equally diverse intervention goals.  In general, respondents agreed that intervention needs to happen at a variety of levels and that family and community need to be significant agents of confrontation and change.

Staying in the Community

The notion of "community" emerged in virtually all areas of concern.  All respondents shared frustration with individualized and compartmentalized definitions of and responses to domestic violence.  While focus on the "community" characterizes many API domestic violence interventions, the nature of and goals of these interventions is unclear.  The issue of community-based interventions needs further unpacking.

Limitations of API Intervention Strategies

API advocates and activists revealed some criticisms of their own approaches.  Some of these were based upon the adoption of mainstream practices which have limited effectiveness for API communities.  Others reflect the growing institutionalization of once innovative programs.

Many of these areas of critique parallel those of mainstream domestic violence programs.  Demarcating and expanding on areas of innovation as defined within this report could address what some viewed as the limitations of API programs.