Quote:
Originally Posted by GammaPhi88
I don't think that is exactly what Kevin is saying. I think (and Kevin, correct me if I'm wrong), that while the abuse is never okay, it's sometimes hard to find the victim because abuse is so rampant on both sides.
|
Absolutely. I don't condone it, and as others have observed, ultimately things like when they had sex, who said what/did what to whom become relevant. Dealing with these issues is often very personal, and like I said, it's often the case that both parties are in the wrong.
And it's those cases where both parties are in the wrong that I find the law (at least in Oklahoma) doesn't seem to have an adequate remedy. Often, it's the first person to talk to the police or the first person to get to the courthouse to file for a victim's protection order (VPO) (think restraining order for a victim of domestic violence).
In Oklahoma, the standard for awarding a VPO is pretty low, just that there has been domestic violence, stalking, harassment, dropping off of items at the victim's home, etc. And to go along with that, in the divorce arena, if the court finds there's domestic violence (and it often does in a he-said/she-said context), then there's an automatic presumption that the complaining party should get custody of the child. It's a great way to gain a leg up in a custody proceeding and is abused all the time.
On the civil end, I've both prosecuted and defended these actions and in the majority of the cases, I think the statute is being misused and that there should be a more adequate remedy. Treating one party as the "victim" and the other as aggressor, which is usually a distinction based on gender, is often a wholly inadequate means to tackle this issue in the courtroom context.