[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.A.S.C. No. 116-44]
SHATTERED FAMILIES, SHATTERED
SERVICE: TAKING MILITARY DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE OUT OF THE SHADOWS
__________
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
HEARING HELD
SEPTEMBER 18, 2019
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
41-472 WASHINGTON : 2020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL
JACKIE SPEIER, California, Chairwoman
SUSAN A. DAVIS, California TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
RUBEN GALLEGO, Arizona RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana
GILBERT RAY CISNEROS, Jr., LIZ CHENEY, Wyoming
California, Vice Chair PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan
VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas JACK BERGMAN, Michigan
DEBRA A. HAALAND, New Mexico MATT GAETZ, Florida
LORI TRAHAN, Massachusetts
ELAINE G. LURIA, Virginia
Craig Greene, Professional Staff Member
Dan Sennott, Counsel
Danielle Steitz, Clerk
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
STATEMENTS PRESENTED BY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
Kelly, Hon. Trent, a Representative from Mississippi, Ranking
Member, Subcommittee on Military Personnel..................... 3
Speier, Hon. Jackie, a Representative from California,
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Military Personnel................. 1
WITNESSES
Clubb, Brian, Coordinator, Military & Veterans Advocacy Program,
Battered Women's Justice Program............................... 13
Hughes, Rohini, Survivor and Advocate............................ 7
Johnston, A.T., Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for
Military and Community and Family Policy Department of Defense;
and Kenneth Noyes, Associate Director, DOD Family Advocacy
Program (Military Family Readiness Policy), Department of
Defense........................................................ 28
Lee, David S., Director of Prevention Services, PreventConnect... 12
Olszewski, Leah, Survivor and Advocate........................... 6
Ranta, Kate, Survivor and Advocate............................... 4
Vassell, Arlene, Vice President of Programs, Prevention, and
Social Change, National Resource Center on Domestic Violence... 10
APPENDIX
Prepared Statements:
Clubb, Brian................................................. 109
Hughes, Rohini............................................... 67
Johnston, A.T., joint with Kenneth Noyes..................... 117
Lee, David S................................................. 95
Olszewski, Leah.............................................. 53
Ranta, Kate.................................................. 43
Speier, Hon. Jackie.......................................... 41
Vassell, Arlene.............................................. 81
Documents Submitted for the Record:
[There were no Documents submitted.]
Witness Responses to Questions Asked During the Hearing:
[There were no Questions submitted during the hearing.]
Questions Submitted by Members Post Hearing:
[There were no Questions submitted post hearing.]
SHATTERED FAMILIES, SHATTERED SERVICE: TAKING MILITARY DOMESTIC
VIOLENCE OUT OF THE SHADOWS
----------
House of Representatives,
Committee on Armed Services,
Subcommittee on Military Personnel,
Washington, DC, Wednesday, September 18, 2019.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:07 p.m., in
room 2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Jackie Speier
(chairwoman of the subcommittee) presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JACKIE SPEIER, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
CALIFORNIA, CHAIRWOMAN, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL
Ms. Speier. Good afternoon. This hearing will come to
order. I want to welcome everyone to this hearing of the
Military Personnel Subcommittee on domestic violence in the
military.
We are here today because domestic violence has become a
forgotten crisis in our military. It has been 15 years since
the DOD [Department of Defense] task force analyzed domestic
violence within the military, yet we have seen unsettling
warning signs since. Within the last few months, DOD reports
have highlighted concerning failures in our services' domestic
violence prevention systems. The DOD has not responded
urgently.
Today, we will hear from three survivors of domestic
violence in the military who are bravely coming forward to
share their experiences in the hopes that others may be helped.
Their stories are riveting, they are painful, and they are
real. Because we lack data that is recent, plentiful, or
granular, we must rely on survivors, advocates, and experts to
help us understand the unique challenges of dealing with this
crisis within the military.
Major Leah Olszewski is still on the run from a violent
abuser. Air Force officials at every level refused to help her
despite knowing of past incidents.
Kate Ranta found justice in the civilian--not military--
court system but only after her violent ex-husband, who was
allowed to go free and retire from the Air Force, shot her and
her father.
Rohini Hughes and her son Jay were verbally and physically
abused by her husband, who as a JAG [judge advocate general],
used his knowledge of the system against her.
These incidents impact victims, families, communities. The
DOD must learn to believe survivors and take action based on
their claims and evidence. Denial, favoritism, and a complex
bureaucracy cannot shield dangerous perpetrators.
Domestic violence is not unique to the military. According
to the CDC [Centers for Disease Control and Prevention], 1 in 4
women and nearly 1 in 10 men have experienced intimate partner
violence in their lifetimes. And, as with civilian domestic
violence, there is no, quote, typical, unquote, military
domestic violence case. That means policy must account for and
address a wide range of potential aggravating factors.
Adverse childhood experiences may create a propensity for
domestic violence. Poor role models can make it hard to
peacefully resolve conflicts. Law enforcement providing access
to child care and early education, military leadership,
Congress, and the criminal justice system all have roles to
play.
But we must also mitigate the factors of military life that
can exacerbate the risks of domestic violence. Families cope
with new responsibilities, frequent moves, and tough
challenges. Service members may be consumed by military duties
and struggling with post-traumatic or other stresses and a
thirst for high-risk behaviors after multiple deployments.
Military spouses are often isolated, underemployed, and
struggling to make ends meet, living far from friends or
family, and unfamiliar with local resources. It is,
unfortunately, easy to see how these conditions can make
domestic violence possible, more dangerous, and persistent.
When young men and women join the military, they become our
responsibility as one of our Nation's most precious resources.
We are equally responsible for military families who sacrifice
along with the service member. And we are responsible for
military children because exposure to domestic violence has
long-term effects and because military children are
disproportionately likely to join the military themselves.
I believe the military takes this problem seriously, but it
is clear that leadership needs to address this threat with
renewed urgency. Commanders at every level need to make
combating domestic violence a personal--and I underscore that--
a personal priority.
In recent years, Congress has added a UCMJ [Uniform Code of
Military Justice] domestic violence criminal article, required
new reporting on DOD's prevention and response systems, and
explored expanding special victims' attorneys to cover domestic
violence. There is far more to be done, and I hope to learn
about some of these options today.
Today, we will be joined by two panels. The first will
consist of military domestic violence survivors and experts. On
the second, we will have DOD officials responsible for
designing and implementing relevant policies.
We will focus on three main questions during today's
hearing. First, are we taking the crime of domestic violence
seriously enough? Who does it effect, and what happens to them?
Second, how should we prevent domestic violence, reach out to
and care for survivors, and deal with perpetrators? Third, what
do current DOD programs look like? What are their strengths,
and how can we further improve them?
Before I introduce our first panel, I would like to offer
Ranking Member Kelly an opportunity to make opening remarks.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Speier can be found in the
Appendix on page 41.]
STATEMENT OF HON. TRENT KELLY, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM
MISSISSIPPI, RANKING MEMBER, SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY PERSONNEL
Mr. Kelly. Thank you, Chairwoman Speier, for having this
very important hearing today. And this is an issue that I have
been engaged in since I was a city prosecutor in 1999 at the
misdemeanor level and later as a district attorney at the
felony level, and I know of no more serious issue than domestic
violence and what it does to families and lives and all those
around who surround.
I wish to welcome both of our panels to today's hearing. I
particularly want to thank you three survivors of domestic
abuse and for your bravery and your willingness to share your
stories here today and the issues in your story.
Domestic abuse is a serious national issue. On average,
nearly 20 people a minute in the United States are physically
abused by a partner. Unfortunately, the military is not immune
to this national problem. Domestic violence in the military has
lasting negative effects on not just the family in which it
occurs but also in the military community as a whole.
It is imperative that the Department of Defense have a
comprehensive prevention and response program to ensure that
military families have the resources needed to identify and
prevent domestic abuse and that survivors of domestic abuse
have the legal, medical, and behavioral health resources needed
to rebuild their lives and those affected by these acts.
As a former district attorney and city prosecutor, I
prosecuted domestic violence crimes and have put domestic
abusers behind bars. I am a firm believer in education and
transparency in order to prevent domestic violence situations.
And when I say ``education,'' it is not just for the
victims. It is for peers. It is for the abusers. It is for the
chain of command. It is understanding what domestic violence is
and is not, understanding what the solutions are, how to get to
credible solutions. And it is very important and it is a long-
term process to educate all those involved so that we know
exactly how to deal with this problem because it is not
acceptable that it stays even. We want it to get better.
I know firsthand how difficult these cases can be to
prosecute and how traumatic the process can be for the whole
family. Many times they use power of separation from friends
and associates and families to keep them from having a help
line to reach out for. They use financial resources and lack
that the victims have. They threaten that ``I am the only
breadwinner.'' I understand all these unique situations, which
many people in America just quite frankly don't understand, and
it is an education process that commanders at all levels need
to understand.
From ongoing counseling to financial insecurity, it is
imperative that the family receive the support they need after
the criminal case has concluded, not just during but after. No
matter how many resources we provide survivors, however, our
primary goal should be to prevent domestic violence to begin
with.
I am encouraged that the Department has a new prevention
plan of action, which is a comprehensive approach to
prevention, including a focus on awareness and early
intervention. I am also encouraged that the domestic violence
response program leverages the entire scope of community-based
resources.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses who are
survivors of domestic violence about their experiences and what
can be done to improve the process from your point of view.
I am also interested to hear from the other witnesses on
the first panel, some of whom have partnered with the
Department of Defense to ensure their comprehensive prevention
and response programs benefit from civilian best practices.
Finally, I look forward to hearing from the Department of
Defense on the current program and any new initiatives that may
improve the domestic abuse prevention and response program.
Thank you, Madam Chairman, and I yield back.
Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Kelly.
Each witness will have the opportunity to present his or
her testimony, and each member will have an opportunity to
question the witnesses for 5 minutes. We respectfully ask the
witnesses to summarize their testimony in 5 minutes if at all
possible. Some of your stories are riveting, and we will be
somewhat lenient in that regard.
Your written comments and statements will be made part of
the hearing record. Ms. Kate Ranta, survivor and advocate; Ms.
Leah Olszewski, survivor; Mrs. Rohini Hughes, survivor and
advocate; Ms. Arlene Vassell, vice president of program
prevention and social change, the National Resource Center on
Domestic Violence; Mr. David S. Lee, director of prevention
services, PreventConnect; Mr. Brian Clubb, coordinator,
military, and veterans advocacy program, Battered Women's
Justice Program.
Thank you all for being here.
Ms. Ranta, would you like to begin?
STATEMENT OF KATE RANTA, SURVIVOR AND ADVOCATE
Ms. Ranta. My name is Kate Ranta, and I am a survivor of
domestic and gun violence. My former spouse, Thomas Maffei, was
a major in the Air Force. In 2009, we were living in officer
housing on Fort Belvoir. It was there that he began to show
increasingly abusive behavior toward the children and me. He
controlled every aspect of our lives.
During this time, Thomas was also pushing to retire. We
were moving to Florida when the retirement came through. But as
the time approached to close on the house we bought there, he
still wasn't retired. So he said that he would forge orders and
give them to those responsible for arranging PCS [permanent
change of station] moves. He said they wouldn't even question
it, and he was right.
We moved into our new home in early September 2010. Thomas'
behavior became erratic. On January 2, 2011, he took it to
another level. He picked a fight with me, then locked me out of
our bedroom. I heard the sound of a gun chambering. Terrified,
I dialed 911 and ran out of the house. Then I heard the garage
door open and out he came holding our toddler, who was only
two.
He got into the car, and I jumped in with them. He raised
his fist at me, his eyes were black, and he told me to get out
of the expletive car or he would punch me in my expletive face.
I jumped out, and he sped off around the corner.
When I ran back to the house the police were there and so
was Thomas. He was giving his military coins to the officers,
telling them that he was a veteran--he wasn't; he was still
Active Duty--and that he had survived a Humvee explosion in
Iraq. He didn't. He had never deployed. To them, he was a hero,
and I was the hysterical wife.
The next day I got a temporary restraining order, a
civilian one, and he was served. I called his commander at
Andrews Air Force Base, Colonel Timothy Applegate, and told him
about the domestic violence incident, about the restraining
order, about his soldier not being in Virginia but in Florida,
and about the fake moving orders. He was quick to get me off
the phone. He knew he was in trouble too. He had had no idea
that Thomas wasn't even in Virginia for those past 4 months.
Thomas also knew he had to get back to Virginia, which was
what he did. In the meantime, I was connected with OSI [Air
Force Office of Special Investigations] and reported the
situation to them as well. As a result of that, Thomas was
moved out from under Colonel Applegate and placed with a new
commander, Lieutenant Colonel Michelle Ryan at Bolling Air
Force Base, as OSI began its investigation. He was serving on
Bolling with check-in time so they knew he had not left the
base.
During the months he was held at Bolling, Thomas went AWOL
[absent without leave] two different times. Both times, I got
calls from Lieutenant Colonel Ryan that he had not checked in
as he was required to do, that they could not make contact with
him, that my family and I should go somewhere where he couldn't
find us, as she couldn't guarantee that he wasn't on his way to
Florida. Both times they found him a day or two later, but she
gave excuses about his whereabouts.
OSI completed its investigation in mid-March. They were
looking into spousal abuse as well as fraud. I was contacted by
an investigator who let me know that they had found him guilty
of both and would be recommending court-martial. I was
relieved. That was until he told me that Thomas' punishment
could actually be up to his command and that there was a chance
that nothing would happen to him.
Shortly after OSI closed the case, Lieutenant Colonel Ryan
called me. She said that they had handled it administratively
and that Thomas would be retired at the end of March. I
literally begged her to reconsider. She said he had served 25
years, and charging him would cause him to lose his pension.
The military lifted the restraining order they put on him, and
he was released out into society.
A year and a half later, after months and months of
civilian court hearings, Thomas showed up with a .9-millimeter
Beretta, ambushed me at my apartment, and shot through the
front door. My father and I were standing inside the door
pushing against it trying to keep him out. My son, William, was
standing just behind us.
Thomas pushed his way in and shot some more. A bullet went
through my right hand. He shot my dad point-blank in his left
side, and I thought my dad had died. A bullet also went through
my left breast just missing my heart. Another bullet went into
my dad's left arm, leaving it paralyzed.
Thomas did this in front of William, his own son, who was
only 4, his own son who screamed, ``Don't do it, Daddy. Don't
shoot Mommy.'' By some miracle, we all lived. The three of us
got out of the apartment, and Thomas surrendered at the scene.
He spent almost 5 years in jail before we had the civilian
trial where he was found guilty of premeditated attempted
first-degree murder and sentenced to 60 years in prison. So we
saw justice on the civilian side, not the military side.
All of this was avoidable. I hold his command fully
responsible. They knew he was dangerous, but, instead, they
chose not to do a thing about it. Domestic violence in the
military is rampant. There are tons of Thomas Maffeis in their
ranks. I hope this committee will be as appalled as I am about
what happened to us and will take steps to change this ``take
care of our own'' culture in the military at the expense of
women and children whose lives are at stake.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Ranta can be found in the
Appendix on page 43.]
Ms. Speier. Thank you for that very compelling testimony.
Ms. Olszewski.
Ms. Olszewski. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Speier. Pronounce it for us so we----
Ms. Olszewski. Olszewski.
Ms. Speier. Olszewski.
STATEMENT OF LEAH OLSZEWSKI, SURVIVOR AND ADVOCATE
Ms. Olszewski. Good afternoon. My name is Leah Olszewski. I
am a major in the Army National Guard, entrepreneur, daughter,
sister, and one-time intimate partner of an Air Force Senior
Master Sergeant Erik Cardin. Senior Master Sergeant Cardin
misled me from day one.
Initially under the impression he was still at Air Force
Special Operations Command, I later learned he had been fired
and kicked out of the unit 2 years earlier in 2014 for violence
and abuse on service members, abuse that, according to several
airmen, should have gotten him kicked out of the Air Force
entirely.
The Air Force then sent Senior Master Sergeant Cardin to
Afghanistan for a year, where his commander told him if he did
not stop his behavior, he was going to end up in jail. In 2016,
Senior Master Sergeant Cardin was rewarded with a leadership
role at Travis Air Force Base, California. One of his fellow
noncommissioned officers warned Travis leaders of the senior
master sergeant's history but was dismissed. They said they
knew.
Within 9 months of being at his Travis Air Force Base unit,
Senior Master Sergeant Cardin was fired and kicked out again,
this time for three significant acts of violence on service
members. Once again, he was shuffled and made someone else's
problem--no counseling, no court-martial, no consequences.
A month after being fired, Senior Master Sergeant Cardin
and I moved in together, and the severe abuse, emotional and
physical, began. Over the next 6 months, I was a slut or a
whore just like other women, should know my place as a woman.
He isolated me, was jealous, enraged, and explosive. He
constantly threatened me to break my neck and bust my teeth
out.
There were five physical assaults, including strangulation.
Then, on October 11, 2017, my world came to an end when,
preceded by 3 days of emotional abuse, he kicked me in the
abdomen with both of his feet. Among other things, he knew I
was pregnant. I called the police, and he ran from the house.
Over the next 3 days, I miscarried.
When command learned of the physical abuse, they simply
said: Run away, Leah. He is doing you a favor.
For the next 11 months and to this day, I have battled with
the Air Force to do the right thing. Every entity on Travis Air
Force Base, from command to family advocacy to security forces,
failed me. They just waited on the senior master sergeant to
retire.
I asked for help from command at Joint Base McGuire-Dix-
Lakehurst, Scott Air Force Base, and directly from former Air
Force Secretary Wilson, General Goldfein, and Chief Master
Sergeant of the Air Force Wright, with no response or a minimal
entirely ineffective response.
The Air Force Inspector General later dismissed several of
my complaints. As they always had, the Air Force turned a blind
eye, sometimes actually actively supporting Senior Master
Sergeant Cardin instead of holding him accountable.
On September 1, 2018, the Air Force honorably retired
Senior Master Sergeant Cardin--no demotion, no court-martial,
no consequences. Now he laughs in court about the miscarriage,
abuse, and my suffering, and has continued to terrorize me by
skipping over 48 other States and moving down the road from me
knowing I was here.
He had no friends, no job, no family, no clearance, no
reason to be here. He violated his restraining order in April
and is retaliating against me still by trying to ruin what is
left of my Army career. I live in fear, heavily burdened every
day.
The Air Force is responsible for enabling and emboldening
Senior Master Sergeant Cardin over many years, for putting
service members and communities at risk, and for all of my
losses. If they will do this to me, they will do this to
everyone and anyone.
If Air Force leaders won't even listen to its own members
regarding Senior Master Sergeant Cardin, let alone me, and
years of workplace and domestic violence equate to nothing in
their eyes, how many others are there, and what does it take?
What does it take?
Thank you for your time.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Olszewski can be found in
the Appendix on page 53.]
Ms. Speier. Thank you so much, Ms. Olszewski.
Mrs. Hughes.
STATEMENT OF ROHINI HUGHES, SURVIVOR AND ADVOCATE
Mrs. Hughes. Honorable members of the Armed Services
Subcommittee, staff, respected experts, and witnesses present
here today, as a former citizen of New Delhi, India, and now a
U.S. citizen, I am a proud military Air Force spouse, a former
spouse. I humbly and thankfully submit my testimony while being
grateful to you for this opportunity to share my story on
behalf of countless military families, my family, and my son
Jay Hughes, who is with me here today.
I am a patriotic military spouse who served as a Key Spouse
program manager for various Air Force units, and I have been a
proud stay-at-home mother for the last 20 years while serving
our military, our community, and my family.
My former husband, Major Matthew ``Matt'' Ernest Hughes is
a prior Navy reservist, a former Active Duty U.S. Air Force JAG
Corps officer, an AFLOA [Air Force Legal Operations Agency], at
Joint Base Andrews, and currently has a private practice in
Rockville, Maryland, while still serving as an Active reservist
at an unknown location. Major Hughes has had four tours of
deployment.
On December 24, 2014, our world shook and was changed
forever when my husband wiped out all our accounts, canceled
our credit cards, and made stop payments on all outstanding
checks. He followed these actions with an email to me stating
erratic and controlling demands with a timeline attached for
each demand.
These demands clearly defined us as slaves to be
objectified and owned, not to be loved, not to be respected,
and not to be honored. Examples of Major Hughes' behavior was
repeatedly laughing while degrading, tormenting, enjoying his
cruelty towards us. Major Hughes would twist our son's nipples
while laughing, forcing his thumbs inside an open, bleeding
wound on Jay's shaking knee, laughing and stating that it
didn't hurt him. He did this repeatedly.
He neglected our unsupervised son while being intoxicated
for several hours, which traumatized Jay, who believed his
father was dead. On other abusive occasions, Jay would lock
himself in a bathroom in fear for his life. Another instance
Major Hughes dumped a large box of food on top of our sickly
daughter's feverish body.
After years of abuse, we sought medical and mental health
assistance. When he discovered this, he made us feel guilty and
prohibited us from going to hospitals and doctors, even after
our daughter's failed attempt of suicide. Then he demanded I
pay rent for continued shelter in our home or accept his offer
of $200 per month for sex in exchange for shelter while he
collected BAH [basic allowance for housing].
We were forced to perform all of the household duties while
he leisurely worked on his body. He would continuously yell in
our faces calling us losers and dumb and lazy, even when I
miscarried or was giving birth to our children.
On December 31, 2014, I contacted Mr. Peter Katson at the
Pentagon's legal assistance office, who encouraged me to
contact the AFLOA commander, Colonel Thomas Zimmerman. My
husband was reported to Child Protective Services in December
2014 for child neglect and abuse by our counselor, formerly at
Meier Clinics, Fairfax, Virginia.
He has been reported again since 2015 by Walter Reed
National Military Medical Clinic, Joint Base Andrews Family
Advocacy Program, and Fort Belvoir Adolescent Inpatient Unit,
and yet I am being falsely accused of parental alienation.
In March 2015, Major Pamela Blueford, at the Joint Base
Andrews' Family Advocacy Program, FAP, began reviewing the
complaints submitted by Dr. Comilang at Walter Reed and began
treating me with hostility during an interrogation in front of
Ms. Mary Young, the victim advocate at FAP present at that
time.
She questioned my intentions and motives for seeking mental
health assistance while repeatedly telling me these types of
allegations could negatively affect my husband's career in the
Air Force. Major Hughes' deputy in AFLOA told me my marriage
would likely be headed towards divorce while stating that this
was a civil matter, disregarding the reported evidence of
abuse.
Additionally, she stated that as long as my husband was
paying rent, even though we chose not to return to the home due
to our fears of our safety, he was providing adequate support
and would not be mandated to provide any money to us for food
or lodging while we continued to be homeless.
In July 2015, Major Hughes separated from Active Duty in
the Air Force to go to the Reserves. He utilized his separation
orders to terminate our lease prematurely under the provisions
of the Servicemember's Civil Relief Act, forcing my family into
homelessness for almost 2 years.
There were many other documented events of abuse, none of
which supposedly met the Joint Base Andrews FAP abuse criteria.
However, it did meet DOD's abuse criteria by 100 percent. After
each abusive episode, Major Hughes would drink, deny his
abusive actions and behavior, words and events, grin, and
laugh. This forced us to begin documenting series of abusive
events. We learned new terms, such as narcissism, sociopath,
gaslighting, and coercive control, and parental alienation,
from our therapists concerning Major Hughes.
After several months of being ignored by my husband's
command, AFLOA, interrogated and treated unprofessionally by
FAP, Major Pamela Blueford continued to deny me the written
documentation of the finding. I was informed by Ms. Mary Young
at Joint Base Andrews FAP that this unprofessional behavior and
aggression was a normal occurrence in the FAP office towards
victims all the time.
I am sorry. May I just grab some water?
Ms. Speier. Sure. And then would you be able to sum up?
Mrs. Hughes. Yes, ma'am.
This former JAG has also utilized his position in
exploiting the Servicemember's Civil Relief Act in civil court
in front of a former JAG judge, forcing me to pay almost
$30,000 in legal fees, which I cannot afford.
This is a black eye on our U.S. military. It is the
invisible scars that forever haunt me and my children through
the failed suicide attempt from my daughter and my son's
suicidal ideations. Major Hughes prohibits him from seeking
medical attention. I fear losing my son to suicide while he
eliminates all his assistance that he desperately needs. It is
through our faith in Christ that we are able to sustain and be
here in front of you today.
Unfortunately, my story is not an isolated set of events or
incidents. Many military spouses experience similar abuse,
desertion, abandonment but are afraid to come forward because
they are groomed not to expose their abuse while they are being
silenced.
Thank you for this opportunity today.
[The prepared statement of Mrs. Hughes can be found in the
Appendix on page 67.]
Ms. Speier. Thank you very much, Mrs. Hughes.
Ms. Vassell.
STATEMENT OF ARLENE VASSELL, VICE PRESIDENT OF PROGRAMS,
PREVENTION, AND SOCIAL CHANGE, NATIONAL RESOURCE CENTER ON
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE
Ms. Vassell. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Speier, Ranking
Member Kelly, and distinguished members of the committee. Thank
you for the opportunity to provide testimony on the importance
of prevention. I thank the committee for holding this hearing
to discuss lifesaving prevention practices and strategies.
As mentioned before, I am the vice president of programs,
prevention, and social change at the Natural Resource Center on
Domestic Violence [NRCDV], with over 20 years of experience
responding to the needs of survivors across the Nation. Our
mission at the National Resource Center is to strengthen and
transform efforts to end domestic violence. Since its inception
in 1993, NRCDV has played a key role in providing collaborative
learning and resource development to end and prevent domestic
violence.
The purpose of my testimony is to share strategies for
prevention that could be implemented by the military. These
strategies can help prevent domestic violence before it
happens, benefiting not only military families but all our
communities across the country. The prevalence data has been
shared, but what I do want to emphasize is domestic violence
causes profound and enduring health, economic, and other
consequences across the lifespan. So it doesn't stop.
Additionally, studies focusing on children exposed to
violence finds that one in five children witnessing parental
assault also leads to increased risk of experiencing and/or
perpetrating domestic violence as adults. I also want to
emphasize that children are resilient--it is not a cliche--and
can bounce back with the appropriate age development and
culturally specific interventions.
Prevention is much more than education, and it goes beyond
the individual. We must use a public health approach to prevent
first-time victimization and perpetration from happening.
Violence can be prevented and its impact reduced in the same
way that public health efforts have prevented and reduced
pregnancy-related complications, workplace injuries, infectious
diseases, and illnesses resulting from contaminated food and
water in many parts of the world.
Sexual violence and domestic violence are more complicated
than other public health issues because of the intentionality
of harm and the social stigmas associated with their
occurrence. Primary prevention efforts though impact modifiable
factors associated with domestic violence, such as reducing
acceptance of violence, challenging social norms, practices,
and policies that support or reinforce gender-based violence.
When violence occurs, there is a sense of urgency to
intervene and support victims, hold abusers accountable. We
know these things are necessary, but to stop violence before it
ever happens, it is vital that we recognize that the
connections among issues of health, safety, economic security,
and other factors affecting well-being can increase public
understanding of the complexity of the violence. This
understanding, according to the CDC, the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention, will help inform primary prevention
efforts.
Our approach at the National Resource Center on Domestic
Violence is awareness plus action equals social change. We have
seen success in using this formula and many organizations and
communities have adapted this approach. Awareness, increased
knowledge, action, we develop and disseminate resources and
tools to proactively prevent first-time victimization and
perpetration by interrupting the cultural rules, norms, and
constructs that it supports.
Based on evidence, my expertise, and experience
collaborating with various military communities throughout my
career, my recommendations for the military are as follows,
some already mentioned: develop and implement a comprehensive
domestic violence response and prevention plan; create and
foster a culture of equity, dignity, and respect, promoting
health and safety; create policies and practices that support
survivors, always believe survivors, and hold abusers
accountable so that all service members know that domestic
violence is not acceptable and will not be tolerated; develop
and maintain collaborative relationships with community-based
practitioners, social justice organizations, local domestic
violence agencies, and State coalitions. Collaboration is key
in ending and preventing domestic violence. No single agency
can do this alone.
Equip service members, all levels, with tools to recognize
warning signs and encourage safe and effective bystander
interventions to reduce or prevent violence and assault.
As we continue to enhance responses and offer survivors and
their families services that are survivor-centered and trauma-
informed and lifesaving, we must continue to hold abusers
accountable while also creating an accessible pathway for
healing.
And, most importantly, we must commit resources to
addressing the root causes of violence and prevent perpetration
and victimization from ever happening in the first place. As
mentioned before, effective prevention programs require cross-
discipline and multisector collaborations.
Thank you for your support and interest in prevention
efforts, strategies, and evidence-based practices. Preventing
violence means changing our society and its institutions,
eliminating attitudes, beliefs, behaviors, environments, and
policies that contribute to violence and promoting those that
create thriving communities for individuals to live, play,
work, and worship.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Vassell can be found in the
Appendix on page 81.]
Ms. Speier. Thank you, Ms. Vassell.
Mr. Lee.
STATEMENT OF DAVID S. LEE, DIRECTOR OF PREVENTION SERVICES,
PREVENTCONNECT
Mr. Lee. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Speier, Ranking Member
Kelly, and members of the committee.
I also want to thank the survivor panelists for their
courage to speak and really highlight the importance of the
need of changing the culture in our society, changing the
culture in our armed services so we no longer accept domestic
violence and make those changes that can create a place where
people can live their lives to their full potential.
I am the director of prevention at PreventConnect, a
national resource center dedicated to advancing the prevention
of domestic violence and sexual assault. Through my experience,
we have been able to see many ways that prevention does work
and can be able to make a difference.
I am pleased today that we are addressing both survivor
perspectives and prevention strategies for our Nation's armed
services. It is necessary to be informed by survivor
experiences to be able to define how we are going to go ahead
in being able to create the changes we need to do.
It is essential to respond to the needs of survivors in a
trauma-informed manner, to assert the dignity of all people,
and to hold those who have committed abuse accountable.
However, those responses after violence has occurred are not
sufficient to prevent such forms of violence from happening in
the first place, nor are they sufficient to prevent them from
happening in the future.
Only with an intentional investment in prevention will you
be able to change the culture that creates the condition which
allows domestic violence and other forms of violence to
continue. Prevention requires much more than awareness.
Prevention is about creating a culture that challenges violence
and the behaviors and the attitudes which contribute to it.
We can learn from several other efforts that have been
taking place. In the Department of Defense's 2018 Annual Report
on Sexual Assault in the Military, the report noted that
historically activities aimed at preventing sexual assault have
primarily centered on raising awareness about the crime. These
approaches have likely contributed to increases in victim
reporting and use of support services, but civilian-sector
research suggests that awareness programming does not translate
in the kinds of long-term behavior change required to prevent
sexual violence in the organizational level. This is also true
for domestic violence.
In order to do this, we must invest in prevention in the
armed services to build a prevention infrastructure. There are
many elements this should include. We need to have committed
leadership for not just addressing domestic violence but its
prevention, a commitment to be able to look at creating that
change of culture that is going to name the problem and take
action and be willing to be able to prevent it.
It is going to require staff who receive good training in
prevention, in understanding the issue, and having staff that
are dedicated to prevention beyond just responding to the needs
of those who have experienced domestic violence. It is going to
require collaborative and engaging partnerships with other
prevention efforts. We have to look at issues of domestic
violence as we are also looking at sexual assault, sexual
harassment, and other mental health issues.
And it requires collaboration with local, State, and
national civilian domestic violence prevention efforts to build
cohesive prevention messages and programs that are going to
work off each other and build off each other.
There are many prevention strategies that can be able to
make a difference or have an impact that we can see, and we
have been dedicating our work and seeing the work that is
taking place. Not much has been taking place within the
military itself, but we have worked with families, workplaces,
schools, and colleges, and sport, where we are seeing the
beginnings of the potential for change.
And there is several opportunities. Part of it, for
example, in the Blue Shield of California's 2019 report ``A
Life Course Framework for Preventing Domestic Violence,'' they
talk about we have to mitigate and reduce childhood exposure to
domestic violence by investing in prevention approaches aimed
at improving the outcomes for parents and their children.
In the Centers for Disease Control's 2017 publication
``Preventing Intimate Partner Violence Across the Lifespan: A
Technical Package of Programs, Policies, and Practices''
highlights strategies that can be able to prevent domestic
violence. This involves engaging influential adults and peers,
in particular, doing work with engaging men to be able to re-
examine masculinity so we can create a new form of manhood that
is dedicated towards promoting gender equity, not male
dominance.
For the armed services, we should look at the lessons
learned in sports and fraternities, for example, where we have
been able to make changes. We need to create protective
environments and that the armed services can take efforts
informed by school-based and workplace initiatives to make
shifts in their culture to enhance safety, promote healthy
relationships and respectful boundaries. And we can strengthen
economic supports for families. Efforts that strengthen the
household financial security and work supports are part of a
comprehensive way to be able to prevent domestic violence.
Domestic violence shatters lives and families and adversely
affects the capacity of the armed services. With an investment
in prevention, we can make a difference in the lives of service
members, their families, and the community. As we continue this
journey towards prevention, we build healthy relationships,
healthy families, and healthy communities.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Lee can be found in the
Appendix on page 95.]
Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Lee.
Mr. Clubb.
STATEMENT OF BRIAN CLUBB, COORDINATOR, MILITARY AND VETERANS
ADVOCACY PROGRAM, BATTERED WOMEN'S JUSTICE PROGRAM
Mr. Clubb. I would like to thank you, Chairwoman Speier,
Ranking Member Kelly, and the members of this committee for the
opportunity to speak on this important topic. I am the
coordinator of the Military and Veterans Advocacy Program for
the Battered Women's Justice Project. I am also an attorney and
a retired Marine officer.
My program is funded by a grant from the U.S. Department of
Justice Office on Violence Against Women. And through our work
in the field, there are a number of issues we have identified
that straddle the prevention of and response to domestic
violence in the military and impact safety. And in the interest
of time, I would like to summarize a number of issues that I
have identified in my prepared testimony.
The Armed Forces Domestic Security Act requires that
civilian protection orders, or CPOs, be given the same force
and effect on military installations as they have in the
jurisdiction in which they are issued. However, it is difficult
to enforce a CPO if key personnel on the military installation
do not know of its existence.
Registration procedures for CPOs can ensure that
installation commanders and military law enforcement know about
them, and that knowledge is crucial to enforcement. But despite
the fact that the DOD policy permits such procedures, my
experience is that it is rare the installations have them.
Commanding officers also have the authority to issue
military protection orders, or MPOs, to any service member
under the command and have wide discretion as whether or not to
do so. Commanding officers sometimes issue only verbal orders
that do not provide protected parties with a written copy nor
placement in the service member's record book, which are both
required under DOD policy for written MPOs.
In addition, this policy avoids the DOD requirement to
submit MPOs to the National Criminal Information Center. This
requirement was instituted in response to Federal law which
mandates that commanding officers notify appropriate civilian
authorities when any party to an MPO does not live on a
military installation.
Unfortunately, the recent DOD IG [Inspector General] report
did not look at this particular issue, let alone the service's
compliance with the actual Federal law and what it directs the
military to do.
Another concern about MPOs is expiration dates. Federal law
states the MPOs shall remain in effect, quote, until such time
as a military commander terminates the order or issues a
replacement order, unquote.
Several years ago the Department of Defense began a process
to revise the standard MPO form. However, that process has
stalled. In an interim, DOD has not issued any guidance
regarding the issue of expiration dates. Arguably, as a result,
commanding officers violate Federal law every time they sign an
MPO with an expiration date.
There is also the issue of firearms. Much research exists
on the use of firearms in domestic violence homicides, and
firearms are the most common manner of death in civilian as
well as military domestic homicides. Federal law and many State
laws restrict the possession of firearms by those that are
subject to CPOs.
However, we have no data as to how or if the military is
enforcing personal firearms restrictions against service
members or against civilians who are on military property and
subject to those orders or whether commanding officers include
firearms restrictions when they issue military protection
orders.
One issue that is not in my prepared testimony that I think
has been raised by the testimony of the survivors here today is
deferential treatment to senior service members. I oftentimes
hear from individuals, to include some of the members on this
panel today, in which it appears as if commanding officers and
the whole military response is much more deferential to
individuals of senior rank as well as those individuals who are
coming close to retirement.
The last issue I would like to address is collaboration
between military installations and the local communities in
which they are located. Collaboration is crucial as military-
related victims and their abusers are often navigating two
different and sometimes conflicting systems. These two systems
must actively work together, effectively share information, and
evaluate their processes in order to ensure that negative
consequences don't occur and to increase safety for victims and
others.
DOD policy does direct collaboration between military
officials and civilian counterparts. But beyond military FAP
programs and their civilian counterparts, my experience is that
the levels of collaboration between military installations and
local communities as a whole is, at best, spotty. Collaboration
takes a willingness of all parties, and DOD policy by itself
cannot enforce those in civilian communities to do so.
Our organization previously partnered with the National
Center on Domestic and Sexual Violence and DOD on a multiyear
project to create a Military-Civilian Coordinated Community
Response Model. That work identified the difficulties in
establishing and maintaining military civilian collaboration,
to include jurisdictional issues, different reporting systems,
confidentiality, and, of course, cost.
I look forward to answering any questions that you or the
committee members may have. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Clubb can be found in the
Appendix on page 109.]
Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Clubb.
Thank you all for your outstanding testimony and to the
survivors. Such extraordinary courage and such painful memories
that you had to live through once again, but in so doing you
have provided us with a great deal of understanding of how
ubiquitous this issue is. And, as Mr. Clubb said, for those who
are senior service members or are near retirement, you are
poster survivors of what happens under those circumstances.
Let me just start, Mr. Clubb, you referenced the use of
firearms. If someone in civilian life now has been convicted of
domestic violence, or even if they have been charged but not
convicted, there is a means by which you can take their
firearms away for a period of time, red flag laws being one of
the examples.
Does it not have a negative impact on the service member if
they can't use a firearm in the course of their duties and,
therefore, makes the commander less likely to want to impose an
MPO?
Mr. Clubb. Chairwoman, there are two specific Federal
domestic violence statutes or substatutes within the Federal
Gun Control Act. There is the Lautenberg Amendment, which
requires--provides a prohibition for ammunition and firearms
for anyone who is convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic
violence.
There is also a provision which restricts both possession
and ownership of firearms and ammunition if an individual is
subject to a qualifying court order specifically in which there
is a domestic relationship, intimate partners, due process, et
cetera.
The Lautenberg Amendment does prohibit individuals,
lifetime. There is no exemption for that. So, if an individual
is convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence and
they serve in the military, they eventually will be processed
out because of their inability to carry a firearm.
The qualifying court order prohibition does not have that
same response and--or it does not require through DOD policy
any sort of eventual discharge for that reason. There is also
the official use exemption that allows government employees, to
include military service members, who have to carry a firearm
for the performance of their duties in order to do that and not
violate Federal law.
It has not been my personal experience that--and most of
that is hearing from victims and survivors and from attorneys
and advocates that are working on these issues directly--direct
cases in which there is a--commanding officers not wanting to
issue military protection orders for that reason. But at the
same time, I think there is a lack of knowledge among
commanding officers in general.
Ms. Speier. Thank you.
To each of you extraordinary women, if you had one thing
that you would like to have seen changed in your set of
circumstances that would have improved your ability to deal
with the trauma of domestic violence or one thing as you look
to speaking out on behalf of domestic violence victims who come
after you, what would that be?
Ms. Ranta. Well, for myself and my family, I think the
pivotal moment was when OSI closed the case, and I was told
that it would be up to his command whether to do anything about
it or not. I was naive. I am not from a military family. I had
no idea how to navigate this system, and it made no sense to
me.
But as I said at the end of my statement, I do hold his
command fully accountable for the eventual outcome because I
had done everything right. I had reported. I had gotten the
protection order. I, you know----
Ms. Speier. And OSI had recommended to commanding----
Ms. Ranta. Right. And OSI had recommended a court-martial
for him, and I do believe that, had he been held accountable
and had the military taken care of things on their end, you
know, the lethality that eventually happened on our end--almost
death--could have absolutely been avoided.
So just the idea that, okay, well, he served 25 years and
his pension would be affected to me was, like, outrageous, and
he should have absolutely been held accountable. Being found
guilty of fraud and spousal abuse and court-martial
recommendation should have absolutely happened, and I really do
believe that we may have avoided near death.
Ms. Speier. Thank you.
Ms. Olszewski. Likewise, on the command issue specifically,
because going back many years command failed to do anything
with him previously. I think my goal is still to have him
court-martialed, which can be done, from what I understand,
without bringing him back to Active Duty. And, again, that goes
back to the failure to court-martial him years ago really stems
from command more than anything.
Now, I had multiple issues with security force
investigators never investigating, OSI not knowing for, you
know, 7 or more months, just a wide variety of failures. But in
the end, it was command going back many years that failed to do
something that could have prevented me from ever meeting him
potentially or could have mitigated or completely prevented his
abuse of me.
Ms. Speier. Mrs. Hughes.
Mrs. Hughes. I would have to agree with my other
colleagues. In addition to the command definitely being held
responsible, the failure of their role in stepping forward and
recognizing the reported abuse, the evidence of abuse, in
addition to FAP's failure in stepping forward and implementing
and executing the DOD's abuse criteria.
I don't believe that that was done in my case, and that
seems to be the main common thread among many other military
spouses who are groomed to, first of all, not bring the abuse
forward because this fear is instilled in us, and we are
groomed to believe that it will destroy the service member's
career.
But then, when we do come forward, it is completely
screened out by concluding that it didn't meet the abuse
criteria, shutting down each and every resource that we could
possibly obtain in seeking justice or protection for ourselves.
Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. Speier. Thank you.
Mr. Kelly, 5 minutes.
Mr. Kelly. Thank you, Chairwoman, again.
And first of all, you know, I want to talk--we talked about
strangulation. And when I was a district attorney [DA] in
Mississippi, I was very helpful in trying to get the law
changed so that it became a felony in Mississippi because that
is one of the most controlling behaviors that a domestic abuser
can have, is strangulation.
And so I guess my question to you guys--if you know the
answer. If not, I hope DOD is listening. I will ask it later--
is strangulation a felony domestic violence in the military?
Mr. Clubb. Congressman, I know that, with the addition of
UCMJ article--I believe it is 128(b)--that establishes domestic
violence assault, I believe that strangulation is included in
that. But, of course, it depends on how it is prosecuted in the
military. Clearly, if it is non-judicial punishment, that is
not a conviction and----
Mr. Kelly. Thank you. I want to get to some more. But
number one is we have got to make sure strangulation at least
has the ability to be prosecuted as a felony.
And second, I want to give--my wife is a victim assistance
coordinator back home for the DA's office, and so we are very
involved and engaged in this. And one of the things that
Mississippi also passed a law on while I was district attorney
that--is, if you are charged with domestic violence,
misdemeanor or felony, you are not allowed to plead that down
to some other violation that does not include domestic
violence. So you can't plead to something that is not domestic
violence so that the Lautenberg Amendment does kick in. Because
it is very important that when someone has committed a domestic
violence act and they have been convicted of that, that they
lose their ability to carry a firearm and then--and part of the
problem is, quite frankly, ATF [Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives] would not prosecute or do anything
with those things when reported when I was a prosecutor. ATF
would not come take the guns away when I would call them and
say, ``This guy is a convicted domestic violence guy that has a
firearm,'' and they would not come take it.
And we have got to enforce the laws that we have. Rather
than looking for new laws, let's enforce the laws that we have
also. Because I think that is helpful to enforce Lautenberg to
not be able to carry a firearm forever once you are convicted
of a felony or of domestic violence.
How helpful would it have been to you survivors had the
military--when you talk about pensions for senior--if they
would have said, if convicted of domestic violence, whatever
degree of pension you have earned to this point as a senior
service member goes to your spouse and children to take care of
them, but you don't get it. How helpful would that have been to
you three?
Ms. Ranta. Yeah, so extremely helpful. So, like I said, I
am not--I don't know really the ins and outs of the military. I
was only married to him for 3 years. My understanding was that,
as the spouse, I was not really entitled to any of his pension
because we had to be married for 10 years. But we did have--we
do have a child together, and, you know, my child hasn't seen a
dime of his precious pension that they so wanted him to keep.
So, yeah, it would have been extremely helpful if that had been
an option.
Mr. Kelly. Because that financial instability or the
ability to pay your bills and take care of and have a place to
live--I heard your story--to have a place to live--that he has
to look for a place, not you. He has to look for a place, not
your kids. He has to look for a place to live.
And those are--so we need to make sure that we are
educating folks so they know that, if someone leaves, it is not
the victim; it is the abuser who has to leave. And now if they
are found innocent and those things, then that is a whole
different ball game.
But until that point, once the accusation is made, we need
to take care of our victims and make sure that they have a
place to live, that they [have] healthcare, and that their pay
continues, whether that be through whatever. With those type of
policies, that DOD helps you as a victim until resolved in
finality, and then also not being able to plead down to
something less than domestic violence, would that be helpful?
Ms. Olszewski. So I know for me, sir, it is a little bit
different, but luckily there is the California Victims
Compensation Program, which I have been able to get some
assistance from. So, for me, it is a little different,
obviously, but I did incur--I went into huge debt leaving out
of California and things of that nature.
I don't know that I am actually really eligible for
anything, but--so, for me, it doesn't really apply so, I just
wanted to----
Mr. Kelly. And then the final thing, and I guess I just got
time for a comment, but I want to make sure that we understand
how to get either civilian protection orders and military
protection orders. There needs to be a policy of who in the
chain of command gets those and to be a validation that they
have to be and they are required by the violator to turn those
over to the chain of command, which becomes a crime if they
don't do so.
And, with that, I yield back, Chairwoman.
Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Kelly.
To your point, 70 percent of our service members live off
base. So the likelihood of a CPO being identified by the
perpetrator and reporting it to the command is somewhat, I
think, challenging. It seems like we need to put something in
place where there is a sharing of that data between the two,
the civilian and the military.
Mr. Clubb. Chairwoman, there is a DOD policy that requires
service members to reveal or tell their command when they are
not eligible, but whether or not, especially younger service
members, really understand that if they have a protection order
against them is debatable.
Ms. Speier. Right. Right.
Mrs. Davis for 5 minutes.
Mrs. Davis. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Thank you all. I really appreciate your testimony.
I wanted to just start with Ms. Vassell for a second,
because you listed a number of best practices, resources. And
as I am sitting here listening to those, I am wondering whether
our survivors are sort of thinking about those too and then
feeling so frustrated because none of those things seem to be
there for them.
And so where is the connection? You know, we often talk
about best practices. We want to change the culture. We want
people to be able to go for help when they need it and maybe
even if they are not sure they need it, but they have a sense
that something is wrong in their situation.
And I know it was mentioned that, you know, we need to
connect some of the training, the culture. And yet we are
talking about this, and it has been a long time that we have
been talking about this, and that is my frustration. So the
question that the chairwoman asked about pointing to one thing
that would have made a difference, could you point to a
systemic problem that we could fix that would prevent this from
happening to anyone else? Do you feel you answered that
question, or is there something else in this that is just
amiss?
Mrs. Hughes. Ma'am, I believe, as Mr. Kelly mentioned, we
currently have excellent provisions in the legislation. We
currently have an incredible DOD abuse criteria. I don't
believe that it needs to be improved. I believe it needs to be
executed. I think there is a major impediment in gaps that we
need to recognize today, that, unfortunately, the commanders,
either through the lack of knowledge or the lack of desire or
the lack of--I say this respectfully--their arrogance, they are
not executing what Congress and the military has already put in
place.
So, even though I appreciate the best practices from my
colleague, I think it is imperative that we look at the
Servicemembers Civil Relief Act. It is an incredible Federal
law placed and set to serve the military families, yet it is
being exploited by the service members. So what can we do to
tighten it?
So I don't believe that new practices are going to be
necessarily a negative; they would certainly help. But I think
focusing on what we currently already have and executing it and
holding individuals and commanders accountable is where the key
is, because I think one common thread amongst all three of us
is the commanders' failure to act and hold the service member
responsible.
Thank you, ma'am.
Mrs. Davis. How would you communicate that? As a spouse, I
know that one of the issues is the fear of somehow interrupting
a spouse's career or a partner's career, whatever that may be,
and somehow that being such a wholly negative and fearful thing
to do. What would you change?
Ms. Ranta. So I personally was not very afraid of the
possibility of something happening to his career. I really felt
like he needed to be held responsible. He had done this to me.
He had done this to my children. I was in the right, in the
sense that I had done the things that I was supposed to do, and
he wasn't being held accountable.
And I think the frustration comes with, as we have said,
you know, going to the commander, nothing happening, but then
where do you go from there? And not knowing how to navigate.
And it is just incredibly frustrating and you feel very, very
helpless. And it is just an entire cultural shift that has to
happen. And other than speaking out and telling my story
anywhere and everywhere, I don't know how to do that.
Ms. Olszewski. If I could quickly touch on that. So, in my
case, I was concerned about protecting him--that is often the
case with domestic violence victims--but I also thought about
my own career with the military and how to tell my commander,
``Hey, this is what is going on.'' And it all came down very,
you know--it was just difficult for me. So I think domestic
violence victims that are service members have their own set of
issues on top of being a spouse.
Mrs. Davis. Do we need better help lines for fear of--that
is not--but being able to identify someone higher up? You don't
feel that that is a resource either?
Ms. Olszewski. Well, so I made phone calls. I relied on
friends that were Air Force service members who cared about
what I had been through to contact and get email addresses for
the next chain of command, the next chain of command, the next
chain of command, although they did nothing as well.
So I think it is a good idea to know where you can go, but
if different entities aren't really sharing that information
because they have something to cover up or----
Mrs. Davis. And you think had this been only in the
civilian sector, where would you have gone in that case?
Ms. Olszewski. Right. I am not sure. I never had--been a
domestic violence victim, so I wouldn't say that I had clarity
on that as well, but surely within the military, which they are
supposed to have higher standards, I would have expected more.
Mrs. Davis. Thank you. I know my time is up. Maybe we will
come back.
Mrs. Hughes. Ma'am, just, lastly, I would like to answer
your question.
Ms. Speier. Mrs. Hughes, we are going to come back to you.
Mrs. Hughes. Thank you.
Ms. Speier. Mr. Mitchell for 5 minutes.
Mr. Mitchell. Thanks very much, Madam Chair.
We owe spouses and children of service members a great deal
of gratitude and attention for the sacrifice they go through
while people serve. People like the individuals you described
today, they are not effective service members either. Let's be
honest about it. We do not want those people serving in our
military.
They are dangerous. They don't represent our military well.
They don't represent our Nation well. So the idea that somehow
we are protecting their career, they shouldn't have one. That
is, in my opinion, something we need to address in terms of
policy discussions with the Pentagon, if need be,
legislatively. If you are a domestic violence perpetrator, you
would do that to other people, and that is a violation of our
morals. So I don't care about their career.
Let me ask you a question. It seems to me there is a system
in place, you went through the process, but it just flat out
didn't work. Is that a correct assessment, ladies? Go ahead.
Mrs. Hughes. Sir, just this is an answer in conjunction to
answering Mrs. Davis'. When I contacted the federally regulated
domestic violence hotline to discover and seek out any sort of
resource that the military had failed to provide me, because
they only referred me to calling 211 when we were going into
homelessness, I was told that, as a DV [domestic violence]
victim, I would be deferred back to the military installation's
FAP for further assistance, which had already turned me down.
It told me that they were not going to be able to do anything.
The only thing that they offered for assistance was counseling,
which I had already been receiving from Walter Reed, sir.
Mr. Mitchell. Let me ask each of you, have you gotten any
information that any of the commanding officers that you
contacted through the process in any manner were held
accountable or questioned about this at all by their senior
commanding officers?
Ms. Ranta. Yeah, I will answer for my case. Like I said, he
was retired. To my knowledge, Colonel Applegate is retired and
retired in 2013. Nothing ever happened to him. As far as I
know, it got swept under the rug that he was made aware that
Thomas Maffei was AWOL and not even living in Virginia and had
gone to Florida. And then Lieutenant Colonel Michelle Ryan, my
understanding is she works at the Pentagon, and I think she
also retired too. Nothing ever happened.
After we were shot, I sent his mugshot and media links to
both of his commanders and sarcastically thanked them for, you
know, protecting their soldier instead of the soldier's wife
and children, as I had warned. And I received no response.
Ms. Olszewski. If I could say also, I actually filed--so
SECAF [Secretary of the Air Force] office, Lieutenant Colonel
Tyler Lewis, told me in September 2018, after I found out they
had honorably retired Senior Master Sergeant Cardin, that I
would have to show all the failures of the Air Force before
they would relook him.
So I filed a Security Forces/OSI and a command complaint,
which the command complaint alone was about 60 pages.
Initially, the Air Force IG, staff IG had said that they were
concerned for my safety and wanted me to file a complaint.
Well, within 2 months of filing that command complaint, they
basically dismissed it, and they said: This case is closed. We
consider this case closed.
And they would not look at any of the commanders who had
failed years before during my time and thereafter, going all
the way up to the SECAF office.
Mr. Clubb. Congressman, many of the issues that these
survivors have addressed I think goes back to commander
discretion. And we understandably give military commanders a
wide range of discretion on many issues. Regarding domestic
violence, that discretion, in many cases, involves lack of
prosecution, concern about ruining the service member's career,
et cetera, some of the things that we have discussed today.
Mr. Mitchell. Let me stop you a second, sir, and I
appreciate that. You don't have discretion. They should not
have discretion when it comes to abusing your spouse or your
children. What the hell is that discretion?
And I think, Madam Chair, we should have the ranking
members from the Pentagon come over here and have a
conversation of how they are holding their commanding officers
accountable for failure to deal with this because there is a
system there. We have money in the system. We have policies in
place. But they don't want to damage someone's career. They
don't want to damage their own career.
They are damaging our military. They are damaging families.
It is unacceptable. And if they don't like that criteria, we
can find other officers that want to have an Army or armed
services that is respected in the world and in our own Nation.
But to abuse your spouse--and my time is up, I apologize--
to abuse your spouse or children because you have a
psychological issue or whatever other reason you may justify it
is unacceptable in our military, is unacceptable in our
society. But we are sure not going to tolerate it. So we need
to have them come over here and explain to me what they are
going to do to hold them accountable because it disgusts me.
And I appreciate you all coming. Thank you.
Ms. Speier. Mr. Mitchell, thank you for your comments. What
has played out here is really abuse of command discretion. And
in all of your cases, a determination was made that the service
member should be protected over the family member and the
children.
So, much like we have done with sexual assault, we may want
to take these cases up to a higher level so that you don't have
that just inherent conflict of interest that exists because the
commander knows the service member. If it goes up to another
level, that might----
Mr. Mitchell. Madam Chair, in my opinion, until we have
that higher level command and we hold a commander accountable
for their career for failing to manage their forces, we are
never going to get there. I agree with you, and it needs to be
something that, if you won't manage your own personnel, then
you don't belong being a colonel or whatever other--and you go.
As soon as someone is held--a few people are held
accountable in the system--and you understand this, Mr. Kelly.
As soon as some people are held accountable, then, in fact,
they will take it seriously. And we need to insist that they
are going to be, or we will simply find some other officers to
lead our military. It is disgusting.
Thank you for your deference.
Ms. Speier. Thank you.
In addition to holding some of the DOD officials
accountable, I think what we also need to do is bring the
inspector general in, because the inspector general for DOD has
already identified a number of failings in each of the
services, in terms of complying with DOD regulations on
appropriately identifying, fingerprinting, handling these cases
in a manner that is appropriate.
Yes. Now to our colleague Mr. Cisneros, for 5 minutes.
Mr. Cisneros. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
Thank you all for sharing your story today.
Mr. Clubb, I just kind of want to follow up on this, the
same thing about the commanding officer discretion. And you had
mentioned something earlier. But non-judicial punishment [NJP],
how likely are the commanding officers, you know, going to deal
with this through NJP rather than kind of actually reporting or
trying to do it through a court-martial?
Mr. Clubb. I have not seen duty statistics or service
statistics on this the way you--the statistics that we have
seen on sexual assault, for example, that may have been cited
to this committee in the past.
I think part of the reason for that is that, until just
last year, there wasn't a domestic violence article in the
UCMJ, and I believe there is difficulty in tracking. I have not
served as a judge advocate in the Marine Corps, but it is my
understanding, talking to those that are serving within the
services, that there are ways of flagging cases as they go
through the system even before there is a domestic violence
article, identify who the victims are and identifying cases as
falling under this criteria.
But not seeing those statistics from which cases are going
to court-martial, which cases are going to NJP or declining
prosecution or any action, I can only speculate on that.
Mr. Cisneros. Does the commanding officer have any
responsibility? Like we said, 70 percent of, you know, military
personnel are likely to live off base, so this domestic
violence is likely to happen off base out of the commanding
officer's jurisdiction, you know, with civilian authorities.
When those individuals are brought to the command, what
responsibility does a commanding officer have to take action on
that?
Mr. Clubb. Well, commanders can prosecute cases that happen
off installation. And I think part of what I referenced earlier
about military-civilian coordinated community response is the
coordination, collaboration, sharing of information, and
determining who is going to take cases in which either the
civilian authorities could prosecute, military authorities, or
potentially both, and deciding the best place to handle a case
judiciously and effectively.
Mr. Cisneros. Mrs. Hughes, I want to follow up on something
you had said earlier too, right? You said, as a military
spouse, you are kind of groomed, you know, not to come forward
and not to report domestic violence, to not really say
anything.
And I think this is part of that culture that is I guess
instilled in you, right, that we all agree that it needs to be
changed, but who is this, you know, that is instilling this in
you and says, ``No, don't come forward''? I mean, is it other
spouses? Is it, you know, Air Force personnel? Is it Air Force
service members? Who is really coming--who is this culture that
is doing this, that is telling you not to say anything?
Mrs. Hughes. Sir, thank you for asking that question,
because I think it is a very pertinent question. I am the
former Key Spouse for the Air Force in addition to the Key
Spouse program manager. I worked very closely with the first
sergeants and the commanders and the wing commanders, and I saw
time and time again that as we collaborated in the Key Spouse
program manager, the culture there seems to stem from the
military personnel that are grooming these Key Spouses to
ensure that the victims of domestic abuse do not come forward,
do not share the information with the first sergeant or the
commander, because it is going to ruin the career. And then the
first sergeants are coming alongside the victim and reiterating
that information, saying, that: Now, if you report this, let me
remind you what the consequences will be. You are not going to
get any BAH. You are not going to get any type of housing
assistance either. You will be kicked off base.
So these are the kind of fear tactics that are being
instilled in the victims that are the military spouses and
children as well. Thank you.
Mr. Cisneros. And I think I have time for one last
question, but, hopefully, I don't butcher it too bad, but Ms.
Olszewski.
Ms. Olszewski. Olszewski.
Mr. Cisneros. Olszewski. Sorry.
Ms. Olszewski. Good enough.
Mr. Cisneros. So you weren't married to the master
sergeant, correct? Right?
Ms. Olszewski. No. We lived together. We had shared bank
accounts, shared lease.
Mr. Cisneros. So just one thing, and I know this is
something that we have talked about a lot, you know, throughout
Congress, and we talked about the boyfriend loophole, being
that you weren't married. Did you ever come to a situation
where they were saying that, ``Hey, well, you are not married,
this isn't really domestic violence,'' and can you talk about
that a little bit?
Ms. Olszewski. Right. I think that was the thing, and that
is why the commander said to me that day, ``Hey, just run away,
Leah, he is doing you a favor,'' because he thought, ``Oh, this
is so simple; they are just boyfriend-girlfriend living
together.''
So I did feel that the Air Force really looked at us solely
as intimate partners. I guess, according to Family Advocacy,
that is what we were. And then they feel, once an intimate
partner, always an intimate partner. But, again, I didn't
really get any benefit of being a service member, in terms of
even special victims' counsel, which is primarily for sexual
assault, which is great.
But--so there were issues with that. It was really
challenging. But now, of course, that he has filed, you know, a
bogus IG complaint on me because I was an O-4, he is saying
that I--now he has filed an IG complaint in the past few months
saying conduct unbecoming of an officer because I am an O-4,
and he was an E-8 at the time. So he had no problem back then.
SOCOM [U.S. Special Operations Command] commander had no
problem back then with any of this. And now it is being filed,
and my rank is now being used against me to a degree. So, when
it is convenient, we are just intimate partners and boyfriend-
girlfriend; and when it is not, suddenly military service comes
into play.
Mr. Cisneros. My time is expired. Thank you very much.
Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Cisneros.
I have one question before we go on to Ms. Escobar. The
Family Assistance Program--the Family Advocacy Program, excuse
me, is going to be testifying next. Each of you had
interactions with the Family Advocacy Program. So, after you
answer Ms. Escobar's question, I would like for you to think
about what didn't work for you in the F-A-P, or FAP.
Ms. Escobar for 5 minutes.
Ms. Escobar. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
And thank you for your continued focus on issues that need
to be brought to light and that need transparency. And many
thanks to our witnesses, especially for your courage and for
your willingness to tell your story and to help us address an
issue that very badly needs to be addressed and as best we can.
Because of your experience, I am wondering if you could
share--and this is open, actually, for all of you, any of you
who would like to answer this question. Where have we failed
you? Where are some specific instances where we could have and
should have done better so that we can look to rectify this in
the future so that, wherever it was that we failed you, we can
try to fix it? And it is open to any of you, anyone who would
like to go first.
Ms. Olszewski. Okay. I will touch on it really quickly
because I know everyone else has something to say too. So I
kind of believe in what Mr. Mitchell had mentioned about
bringing the leadership, calling them out. I believe that does
matter because it seems like a lot of things that go on are
from the top down, and, really, it needs to be from the bottom
up. So something like the Air Force really needs to involve
victims, in terms of changing things.
So I don't think that a lot of, quote/unquote, leaders will
do anything until they are actually called out, and I think
that is a huge thing to start with that process and then purge
them from the military system, as he mentioned.
Ms. Escobar. Thank you.
Ms. Ranta. Yeah. In my situation, I was basically frozen
out. I had no resources. I had no way of knowing how to
navigate, you know, what to do next. I was just fortunate that
I had military wives that helped me, you know, point me in
different directions on who to report to and what to do.
I mean, I had no guidance at all from his commander. His
commander just wanted, you know, to sweep it under the rug. So,
I mean, they just wanted to make it go away, and that was a
humongous failure.
Mrs. Hughes. Ma'am, as far as I am concerned, I see it as a
major command failure because I believe that the command can
hold FAP responsible to upholding the DOD's abuse criteria,
because the commander has an enormous amount of influence in
these CRB [Central Registry Board] hearings that are taking
place under the FAP umbrella, which, unfortunately, is failing
the system.
So I say this very humbly and respectfully. If we are going
to put service members in command positions that are leadership
positions, as Mr. Mitchell mentioned, can we please ensure that
these individuals have the moral ground to uphold and lead such
critical issues, such as sexual assault and domestic violence
and domestic abuse. And if they don't or if they choose not to,
then I humbly request this subcommittee to assign an oversight
committee which oversees these commanders and holds them
responsible. And that committee would be under your
subcommittee that would work collaboratively with these
commanders at each military installation.
Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. Escobar. Thank you.
Ms. Vassell. And just hearing from the survivors today and
throughout my career--and, again, thank you all so much for
your ongoing courage--the best practices that I had mentioned
earlier were more focused on prevention, right? Preventing the
violence from even happening in the first place and creating a
culture within the military installations with, like, zero
tolerance, and it will not happen. Perpetration will not
happen. Victimization will not happen.
But hearing from the survivors and survivors that I have
continuously heard from, what I would say is policies,
practices, day-to-day practices need to match policies. Abusers
need to be held accountable, regardless of their rank, like Mr.
Mitchell had mentioned earlier. Responses to survivors, if we
are going to talk about, you know, what happens after an
incident occurs, should be survivor-centered, should be trauma-
informed.
The survivors that are sharing with us today, this should
be an ongoing process. Whatever is being enforced or developed
should be informed by survivors throughout the entire process,
not after the fact to say, well, would this work? So I think
engaging survivors throughout the process, listening to
survivors about what works, what doesn't work, and with
enhanced responses and prevention, collaboration with
practitioners, with preventionists, with domestic violence
programs, I think would be another best practice that I would
talk about.
I have coordinated projects that included installations and
domestic violence agencies that resulted in a toolkit for
installations and for civilians. So just talking about
collaboration, collaboration. It sounds like it is not helpful,
but it works, both for prevention and for intervention. So
being survivor-centered, being trauma-informed, and hold
perpetrators/abusers accountable.
Ms. Escobar. Thank you.
Unfortunately, my time has expired. Thank you.
Ms. Speier. So the question on FAP, can you give us 30
seconds of what FAP did or did not do for you?
Ms. Ranta. I didn't even know about it. Actually, in your
office today was the first time I had even heard of FAP. So
that is a failure. Again, I had no navigation. I had no
resources. I had no idea where to turn. So I can't even say
that they failed me because I didn't even know about it. So,
obviously, there is something--there is some link missing
there. I am sure there are people that are like me.
Ms. Speier. Ms. Olszewski.
Ms. Olszewski. Yes. So I actually filed a Family Advocacy
complaint with AMCIG [Air Mobility Command Inspector General],
and they found five of six failures to have occurred. So I did
not learn of FAP either through anybody other than my own
efforts, through the VA [Department of Veterans Affairs],
actually, on Travis Air Force Base. And Family Advocacy failed
to include evidence. They ignored the strangulation,
miscarriage, you name it. They never reported to the commanders
or shared their information. That unrestricted aspect didn't
even occur. So I find Family Advocacy to be kind of a--I don't
want to say a joke, but it is bad.
Ms. Speier. Mrs. Hughes.
Mrs. Hughes. Ma'am, in my particular case, my cases of
abuse in 2015 were never opened. I didn't discover this until I
contacted someone at Lackland Air Force Base. And then,
finally, the abuse cases were opened in 2019, only to come to
the same conclusion, that it didn't meet the abuse criteria.
To me, I am being told repeatedly that FAP is not an entity
to adjudicate; it is just an entity to provide resources.
However, I disagree. From my experience, that that is exactly
what is taking place.
Ms. Speier. They adjudicated and didn't provide services?
Mrs. Hughes. That is correct, ma'am.
Ms. Speier. Mr. Lee, you had said in your testimony that
holding days of recollection or weeks of domestic violence
awareness is, in part, what we tend to do as opposed to
actually drill down and provide the prevention. I want to give
you the last word for the panel.
Mr. Lee. Right. So every October we declare Domestic
Violence Awareness Month. And, indeed, many places will have a
proclamation, and there will be an announcement that goes out.
What we need to be able to do is it is about making that
investment in prevention and being able to look at that 12
months a year, about how leadership is going to be involved,
about how we are going to not just educate but be able to
change the structure and look at how we can use military
culture to be able to say that this is not acceptable.
When we see a culture that--and we heard so many stories of
denial and not being able to--and not about accountability. The
values of the military are about the values that are aligned
with saying that we stand with each other to make sure that we
are going to be stronger together and not a way that is going
to be sacrificing people in the greater mission.
So we need to find a way to use those messages. And there
are prevention programs that we can do that I have described in
my testimony that we can be able to do, that we have been doing
in college campuses, that we have been doing with high schools,
that we have been doing with sports, that we need to be able to
start looking at how we can implement that in military
settings, so we can be able to change that culture from the
lowest rank to the highest officers to be able to make that
change.
Ms. Speier. Right. Thank you very much. You have been
outstanding witnesses. We are now going to take a couple
minutes' recess so we can reset for the next panel. Thank you
again.
[Recess.]
Ms. Speier. Now we are moving on to our second panel. And I
would like to welcome Mrs. A.T. Johnston, the Deputy Assistant
Secretary of Defense for Military Community and Family Policy
at the Department of Defense; and Mr. Kenneth Noyes, Associate
Director for the DOD Family Advocacy Program, Department of
Defense.
Mrs. Johnston, I think you have a statement.
STATEMENT OF A.T. JOHNSTON, DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE FOR MILITARY AND COMMUNITY AND FAMILY POLICY DEPARTMENT
OF DEFENSE; AND KENNETH NOYES, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, DOD FAMILY
ADVOCACY PROGRAM (MILITARY FAMILY READINESS POLICY), DEPARTMENT
OF DEFENSE
Mrs. Johnston. Yes, ma'am. Thank you.
On behalf of Mr. James Stewart and the cadre of dedicated
and expert professionals in the Family Advocacy Program, thank
you, Madam Chair, Ranking Member Kelly, and members of this
distinguished subcommittee for your unfailing support of
quality of life programs that keep our service members and
their families strong and resilient.
Ensuring the continued welfare and well-being of service
members and their families is a responsibility the Department
of Defense takes very seriously, as family readiness is
imperative to readiness of the force. I appreciate the
opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the
Department's efforts in addressing the serious issue of
domestic abuse within the military community.
Joining me today is Mr. Ken Noyes, Associate Director from
the Office of Military Family Readiness Policy, which is the
policy proponent for the Family Advocacy Program.
Before moving on, I would like to thank the witnesses on
the first panel who shared their personal experiences. Each of
you has taken a traumatic, heartbreaking event in your life and
turned it into a call to action. We hear you, and we will
continue to improve our programs and services. You and all
other victims of domestic violence deserve nothing less.
We consider our prevention and response actions to be
comprehensive. However, we recognize that domestic abuse
presents human factor challenges that require continual
training, education, and improvement in the effectiveness and
responsiveness of our system. We cannot do it alone. We must
and we will continue to work with our community and Federal
partners as well as with leading experts in academia.
While we continue to make significant progress in our
efforts to effectively address and prevent domestic abuse
within the military community, the Department is acutely aware
that there is still much work to be done. We remain committed
to the safety and welfare of our service members and their
families and can never forget that our families, unfortunately,
are not immune from the serious national public health issue
that is domestic abuse.
We need and we welcome the continued interest and support
of this committee and Congress in advancing this critical work.
And, with that, we look forward to your questions.
[The joint prepared statement of Mrs. Johnston and Mr.
Noyes can be found in the Appendix on page 117.]
Ms. Speier. Mr. Noyes, do you have any--do you have a
statement?
Mr. Noyes. No.
Ms. Speier. You do not.
I guess my first question, Mrs. Johnston, is, based on what
you heard in the last panel, what steps are you going to take?
Mrs. Johnston. First of all, all the testimony was
absolutely heartbreaking, but what that does is that is a call
to action to us. In these particular cases, I don't know the
specifics, so, in that regard, I would have to refer them back
to the services for action.
Ms. Speier. Well, first of all, two of the people, two of
the victims didn't even know that FAP exists. So wouldn't that
suggest to you that you have a job to do in terms of making
sure that all families know the services that are available at
FAP?
Mrs. Johnston. Yes, ma'am. We have the overarching policy
in the Department, and then, again, we work with the services
to make sure that all resources are known. Unfortunately, it is
not a perfect system, and we will continue to work it.
Ms. Speier. Okay. That really doesn't answer the question
at all. Just because you are the overarching authority and that
the services all have to perform their function doesn't mean
that you don't have a responsibility to demand of them that
they do a better job of providing information, education. And
maybe some of these survivors could be of some value to you in
trying to determine how better you can make that available to
victims.
It would seem to me that one of the questions that was
raised is, is FAP there to provide resources or to somehow make
a determination as to whether or not a case should move forward
or not?
Mrs. Johnston. Yes, ma'am. FAP is absolutely there to
provide resources, but that is also the function to do a
determination.
And, with that, I am going to let Mr. Noyes address that
issue.
Mr. Noyes. Thank you, ma'am.
Chairwoman Speier, I just want to address your question
about outreach and the awareness of FAP. Certainly, we know
that we have more work to do. Domestic violence is a scourge,
and the work that we all have to do together as a community and
as the DOD means that the best way forward is to ensure that
prevention and response are coordinated efforts, because we
know that 70 percent of our families live off installation.
In terms of how we make service members and their families
aware of FAP, we have multifaceted awareness campaigns that
happen in October. And, of course, we understand that that is a
limited way in which we reach out. It is one way in which we
reach out.
We also work with the Department of Defense school system
to ensure that they are aware of our services. And, in fact,
they work with families every day and make referrals to FAP
every day. We have child, youth, and family programs under the
umbrella of Military Community and Family Policy, who also help
us in our outreach to families so that they are aware of the
services that we provide.
We also work with law enforcement, with command, and with
the entire Coordinated Community Response, which is the core of
how we address domestic abuse on the installations. And we work
together to provide the awareness and the outreach to the
community to understand the services that we provide and where
we can be found.
And, again, we know that there is more to be done. Our
services often come with some of the things that the victims
talked about, and that is stigma, not being supported to move
forward, and certainly that gets attached to FAP at times. And
we have a lot of work to do to overcome the stigma for people
approaching Family Advocacy Program, along with our
intersecting and other components that have the same challenges
with people coming forward.
In terms of your other question about accountability and
whether we are a program that focuses on response,
interventions, clinical services, support groups and advocacy,
that is, indeed, our mission. It is separate, as a parallel
process to the work that command, law enforcement, judges do in
order to hold offenders accountable.
We must ensure that FAP is seen as a social service
provider that protects families working in tandem with the
Coordinated Community Response that supports them so that law
enforcement, command, and the court, the military court system
can hold them accountable for domestic abuse, child abuse and
neglect, and the other intervening forms of violence and harm--
--
Ms. Speier. All right. Mr. Noyes, my time is almost
expired. Let me just say this: Two out of the three victims
today didn't even know you existed. We have made trips to bases
around the country, talked to spouses. Oftentimes, they don't
know you exist.
So you have got to look at another way of communicating
with families because the existence of your resource is there;
it is being underutilized or not utilized at all. And I think
that we need you to show greater accountability. I might also
add that I think that when there is domestic violence, to bring
counseling together for the two parents and try and keep the
family together may not be the best strategy, and that appears
to be one of the efforts that you continue to pursue. And I
think that will be discussed at another time, but my time is
expired.
Mr. Kelly for 5 minutes.
Mr. Kelly. I am going to go back to the chairwoman's point.
What additional resources, if any, are necessary by you guys to
make sure that everyone knows that FAP is available? I mean, is
there something we can give you or what is a plan of action to
make sure that at least they have knowledge that you exist? Is
there a plan of action or can we provide more resources that
make that so that the majority of--I mean, some people will
never know, but the majority of people will know that FAP
exists and what it exists for?
Mrs. Johnston. To be honest, I was not aware that people
were not aware. I know that commanders know of FAP. Therefore,
I think that part of the strategy is a reminder of the
programs. When there is a FAP case, the commander actually
oversees the Incident Determination Committee. Would you like
to----
Mr. Noyes. Certainly.
Mr. Kelly. Quickly, because I have got other things I want
to get to.
Mr. Noyes. Yes, sir. We have a comprehensive prevention
plan that expired in 2018, and we are working now to move
forward to create that new prevention plan, based upon the CDC
socio-ecological model that other witnesses spoke about
earlier. Part of that is a comprehensive communications plan,
working with the intersecting components that work against
violence, so SAPRO [Sexual Assault Prevention and Response
Office], Sexual Assault and Harassment, the Office of
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. Looking at----
Mr. Kelly. That is long enough, but here is the bottom
line: If they don't know about it, it doesn't exist. And so
figure it out. If you need more resources, let us know. But if
they don't know about it, it does not exist.
Going back, can you describe the community-based approach
to domestic violence prevention and response, and what
resources do you leverage to do that?
Mrs. Johnston. Yes, sir. The community-based response is we
work with those folks outside the gate, who also have programs.
In some cases, there would be a memorandum of understanding; in
other cases, a memorandum of agreement. But our programs allow
us to make sure that both on the base and off the base that we
are able to offer our services.
Mr. Kelly. And just as a suggestion, and whether or not--
you may already do it and I hope that you do, but every base,
Active Duty base, okay, has a local law enforcement and local
community there. We need to be plugged in at the hip with their
victim assistance coordinator, whether that be at the county or
district level or city level, whatever that is, but we ought to
be plugged into the hip so that nobody gets the gaps.
You know, in the military, we always have to protect the
boundaries. That is where the enemy always likes to attack,
because nobody is looking. And we need to do the same thing
with our communities, our cities or counties, whatever the case
may be. We need to be plugged in with their law enforcement and
their victim assistance coordinators, to make sure that they
are not--we ought to be talking. And so, if we are not, at
least let's make sure we got a plan to talk to communities.
Mr. Noyes. Thank you, sir. I just want to add that, in
terms of our connection to the civilian community and the
partnerships that we have in order to protect domestic abuse
victims and their families, the domestic violence--I am sorry--
the domestic abuse victim advocates that are funded through OSD
[Office of the Secretary of Defense] funding work very closely
to help support the needs of victims and their families. And
they work really closely with community-based programs to
ensure that they have the intersecting supports that, should
the DAVAs [domestic abuse victim advocates] not be able to
provide, because of potential overwhelming need or wherever
there may be a small installation that is isolated that really
needs the use of community resources to help serve people, that
they are constantly working and reaching out, going to court,
helping them get MPOs and CPOs.
Mr. Kelly. I have only got a minute left, so I want to get
to the next point. I understand that those who have been
violent in one context are likely to be violent in another. So
people who mistreat soldiers or airmen or sailors are also
likely to be the same ones who are mistreating their spouse.
So what are we doing to identify and address violent
behaviors at work that may carry over or that translate into
domestic violence? What are we doing to train our commanders so
that they see this bullying at work probably translates into
bullying at home or domestic violence at home. What are we
doing to inform and teach commanders and soldiers?
Mrs. Johnston. I will need to take that back for the
record. That is not an area that FAP has oversight in.
Mr. Kelly. And, with that, you know, we have got a long way
to go. There is nothing more important. But I am going to tell
you, it all comes down to emphasis. And I would just say,
whether or not--we can always have more education, but it is
about transparency, it is about knowledge, and it is about
educating.
And so we have got some work to do to make sure that we
educate the spouses and children to make sure that they know
about the program and what resources are available.
And, with that, Chairwoman, I yield back.
Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Kelly.
Not to beat a dead horse, but in meetings at the various
bases, what we heard about FAP was that they showed up at the
hearing with the survivor, and that was about the extent of it.
So, while you referenced that just now, I think it is so much
more than that, and I think you are hearing that from all of us
here today.
Do you have any funding for research in your offices?
Mr. Noyes. We actually do fund research. The services use
our funding to also fund research that they identify, based
upon trends and gaps that they see in their communities. We
work with multiple----
Ms. Speier. All right. Mr. Noyes, what I think we want then
is where that money has been spent and what has it been spent
on because I think we need to know more about when the domestic
violence occurs.
I have read one study that suggests it happens upon
returning from deployment, and if that is the case, then we
need to make sure there are the appropriate resources available
to families at those particular junctions.
Mrs. Davis.
Mrs. Davis. Thank you. Thank you both for being here.
Mrs. Johnston, you said to the survivors: We hear you. And
I think the question often that they are wondering is, do you
believe us?
And I am wondering if you have any thoughts or, Mr. Noyes,
about the extent to which we are talking I would hope about
perhaps a relatively small number of commands that seem
predisposed not to believe what survivors bring to them. Can
you discuss that? Why would that be the case, if you think it
might be the case?
Mrs. Johnston. I can't speak to an individual commander and
what they would be thinking. What I can say is that there is a
process by which folks come into command, and I would be
hopeful through that process in most cases we will weed out
these kinds of issues, but that would be where I would think
that that would be the place that we would see that.
Mr. Noyes. In terms of FAP's connection to command and the
way that they work with command, it is very focused on when a
victim is being served, either clinically or through a domestic
abuse victim advocate, assuming that it is an unrestricted
report, that the FAP manager or other personnel in FAP will
tell the command, based upon what they have learned in the
case, about the high risk or safety issues.
And in that way, that is the way that FAP is working both
with command and law enforcement is to ensure that they
understand the gravity of both risk and of safety to ensure
that appropriate measures can be taken on the command or law
enforcement side.
And that is where, in terms of thinking about the
difference between FAP and the law enforcement and command
system, where we support victims in sharing what is happening
to them and the risk attached to that so that then command and
law enforcement and staff judge advocates will take it from
there to hold the offender accountable.
Mrs. Davis. So you have a responsibility then to share that
information that you receive that could bring the behavior of a
commander, for example, into question, to follow that through.
Is that correct or----
Mr. Noyes. In terms of command response and responsibility,
it is the services' responsibility to hold them accountable.
Our role is to ensure that they understand what is happening
with the victim and the offender in unrestricted cases, and I
would have to defer to the services otherwise.
Mrs. Davis. I think we are familiar, obviously, with sexual
assault in the military, in terms of restricted and
unrestricted. But in terms of that responsibility to provide
that information to the command, you are saying that you have
that responsibility only if it is unrestricted?
Mr. Noyes. We have a responsibility at FAP first and
foremost to the victim, being victim-centered and trauma-
informed. If a victim has chosen a restricted report, she or
he, they have made that decision for themselves. Our
responsibility is to ensure that the services and, therefore,
the services in monitoring the installations follow DOD policy
as it relates to restricted reports, and that is to provide
services without informing command and law enforcement, because
the victim chose that route.
Mrs. Davis. Chose to do that, okay. And that may be
something that we should--perhaps in domestic violence, we
should look at that as it relates to sexual assault as well.
But my question also is, how do you get feedback? Because
it seems that perhaps there could be a better way, like what we
do in commands when we get the climate, you know, every year,
every few years, right? I don't know whether families would
necessarily fill out evaluation forms. Maybe that is better for
research, the RAND Corporation, whoever.
But how do you know? I mean, could you even say, 10 percent
of our families, 35 percent of our families have no idea what
we do versus--how do you go about understanding the extent to
which people know when they could use your services and that
they are there so that somebody, you know, even first off
when--I think, actually, even when people are getting married,
for example. Because it is the services, it is an important
thing for people to know, what is available to me? What can I
count on? How do people do that? What do you know about? Do you
know how they feel about that?
Mr. Noyes. So I would say that, in terms of educating,
which is I believe what you are asking, educating spouses and
intimate partners about what is available to them, it is back
to ensuring the Coordinated Community Response is working in
tandem with us in each piece of their area of work, so mental
health, hospitals, child and youth programs, education.
We work together to ensure that each of us shares what we
know about the other programs as well and have a referral
mechanism, information and referral mechanism in place so that
we can make sure that families and----
Ms. Davis. I think my time is up. I am sorry. I mean,
Military OneSource is one avenue, perhaps, but----
Mrs. Johnston. Also, the annual--not annual but biannual
spouse surveys, where we actually do survey the spouses on a
variety of topics. So, just this past year, not on the Active
Duty but in the Reserve, we actually asked the question: Do you
know FAP? Have you used FAP? Do you know about the New Parent
Support Program? Have you used the New Parent Support Program?
So we should be getting those results, and we will be able to
better tell of the awareness of those.
Ms. Speier. So, when those results come in, would you
present them to the committee?
Mrs. Johnston. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Speier. Mr. Kelly.
Mr. Kelly. I just wanted to follow up on Mrs. Davis'. She
is talking about a command climate survey which they do every
time they have a new commander, near the end of that. And so we
need to look at something so that they at least have the
opportunity to fill that out so that we get some data on what
they know and if what they know is true. So I don't know how we
look at that, but that would be very helpful.
Ms. Speier. Ms. Escobar for 5 minutes.
Ms. Escobar. Thank you, Madam Chair.
So you sat through the first panel and you heard the
survivors basically say that they had--two of the three--that
they had no idea that you existed. You heard one of the
survivors say she had access to zero resources.
So, having taken that information in and having heard some
of the questions from some of my colleagues, what, in your
mind, do you need to do to make this better?
Mr. Noyes. Family Advocacy Program at DOD has the
responsibility to monitor compliance with policy at the service
level. I am committed, and I know Mrs. Johnston is committed as
well, that in our oversight, we meet with the services
regularly. We bring issues to them. They bring issues to us. We
look at challenges and how we might better inform policy or
practice, what other research might we be doing together.
And this is a place where, as we are developing a revised
oversight framework, that quarterly, when we meet with them,
these issues will be on our agenda so that we begin to figure
out how better to, one, reach people so that they understand
these services are available, but also then coordinate on
planning on where we place priorities moving forward.
Ms. Escobar. And tell me, if you could, how often do you
update your outreach plan? Is there an annual strategic
planning process? Is there a review of where you have been most
successful, where you have not been most successful? What
research informs that plan, and who is a part of building that
plan?
Mr. Noyes. We work very closely with Military Community
Outreach, which is partially Military OneSource but also Public
Affairs, and not only our awareness campaigns but in looking
back at our prevention plan, both primary, secondary, and
tertiary prevention, to include communications and outreach.
It is all part and parcel of a comprehensive planning that
takes place with the services and with the other components
that we are involved with under the umbrella of Military
Community and Family Policy. And all of that work is happening
now. We expect that, in the prevention work that we are doing
at the DOD level with other components that address violence
and harmful behaviors, that comprehensive communication
strategies and outreach strategies certainly will have to be a
part of prevention.
So that work is continuing, and I expect that, within the
next year or so, we would have a comprehensive plan that speaks
to communications, outreach, and using the CDC's socio-
ecological model to address primary prevention.
Ms. Escobar. So the plan that you say will be ready in
about a year or two, are you updating an existing plan?
Mr. Noyes. Part of that work is to update an existing plan.
That plan was in place 2014 to 2018. We continue to use
components of it moving forward as we plan either for new
policy, new practice and standards, or for a strategic plan.
Ms. Escobar. So am I understanding you update it every 4
years? Is that what you are saying?
Mr. Noyes. To my knowledge, the prevention plan was for 5
years. And now we are looking at making decisions about whether
we will do another one for 5 years, whether that timeframe
needs to be different, or whether we need to change our
strategy and look at creating a prevention policy, including
communications and outreach, or whether that would need to be
standards that are brought into DOD policy as well.
Ms. Escobar. Do you know, in the existing plan as well as
the plan that you are now proactively working on, what role do
survivors play in informing that plan?
Mr. Noyes. Based upon my knowledge, that is some
significant work that remains to be done. I know that, at the
service level, they have held focus groups to understand better
about what survivors and families need in order to address
domestic abuse. Again, that is done installation to
installation. It is not policy that DOD imposes on them.
Ms. Escobar. My time is about to expire. I would offer a
recommendation. The recommendation is that this process, this
planning be survivor-centric. That means their voices have to
be predominant in the planning phase. That means their
experiences need to be heard so that you all are able to more
adequately be a presence there for them. They need you. They
need the services that you provide. They need the outreach. And
the only way we are going to fix this is if you listen to them.
Mrs. Johnston. Thank you. We will take that back.
Ms. Escobar. Thank you. My time is expired.
Ms. Speier. Thank you, Ms. Escobar.
Mr. Kelly.
Mr. Kelly. Just one further suggestion. Exit surveys,
whether it is through separation, divorce, separation from
service, I think you could gain a lot of information if you did
exit surveys with spouses and children when they leave the
service, especially when they do it separate from the service
member. I think you could get a lot of helpful information.
And, with that, I yield back, Madam Chair.
Ms. Speier. Thank you, Mr. Kelly.
Mrs. Johnston, Mr. Noyes, thank you very much for
participating in this hearing. I think you have heard loud and
clear that there is a lot of work that needs to be done. I
realize that you are an umbrella entity, but you do meet
quarterly with each of the services.
I am, frankly, sick and tired that we have each service
having a different set of standards and ways of providing
services to their service members and families. I think there
should be some consistency across all the services. But, having
said that, as you meet with them, I think it is going to be
important for you to ask them to do a comprehensive drill down
on what the needs are as it relates to domestic violence. I
understand that you provide all kinds of other services under
FAP, but specifically as it relates to domestic violence.
One of the things we heard was that service members will
oftentimes isolate their spouse and not offer their emails for
communication purposes. We have got to find a way around that.
You have got to be able to use email or Facebook or any number
of other opportunities that exist on these various bases to
communicate with these families. And certainly your FAP
programs at each of the services can identify how to do that,
but that has got to be one of the first steps that I think you
undertake in order to be able to communicate better and give
more information to the community that exists.
So, with that, we will stand adjourned. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 4:08 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]
=======================================================================
A P P E N D I X
September 18, 2019
=======================================================================
PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED FOR THE RECORD
September 18, 2019
=======================================================================
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]