Batterd and Raped Woman DISRACTIONS? WHAT????

[habsheaven]

All I see in this article is repeated statements that this is about PREVENTING abuse and rape. There is no way to prevent it. I am all for support systems for women who have been abused or raped, I just don't see how you figure out what women are at risk for rape or abuse and provide them with prevention counseling.

Okay I will state it again. When the woman calls 911 to report domestic violence and the cops show up ... BINGO!!! you just found a woman at risk. Did you prevent the first beating? No. Do you now have an opportunity to PREVENT the 2nd, 3rd and 4th beatings? Yes, you do (or at least you did when there were programs in place).

[Wickabee]

Okay I will state it again. When the woman calls 911 to report domestic violence and the cops show up ... BINGO!!! you just found a woman at risk. Did you prevent the first beating? No. Do you now have an opportunity to PREVENT the 2nd, 3rd and 4th beatings? Yes, you do (or at least you did when there were programs in place).

Guys, I think we're in an argument over semantics.

Seriously, this argument is going like this:
"These programs are to prevent abuse!"
"They can't prevent abuse! They can only help those who've been abused!"
"They can prevent further abuse!"
"That's not prevention! That's ending abuse!"
"It's the same thing!"
"No it's not!"

Personally, I think it is preventing abuse. If a wife-beater gets thrown in jail, is that not to "prevent" him from beating his wife? At the end of the day, though, it's pure semantics. Whether you call it prevention of abuse or ending abuse, it's necessary and a very bad decision was made.
I wonder if Haley at all played the "women's issues" card when running...

[habsheaven]

I do not even know why they took the thread down the "does it work?" road. The only reason Haley does not support the programs is that it doesn't affect enough people and is therefore not worth the cost. THAT is what the article states. It says nothing about anyone criticizing the programs effectiveness.

[Wickabee]

I do not even know why they took the thread down the "does it work?" road. The only reason Haley does not support the programs is that it doesn't affect enough people and is therefore not worth the cost. THAT is what the article states. It says nothing about anyone criticizing the programs effectiveness.

Hey, I'm with you all the way on this one. Unfortunately this has gone beyond constructive discussion to a you're-wrong-no-you're-wrong back and forth. You're absolutely correct, though, that this shouldn't have anything to do with whether it works (and even at that, we're all sort of agreeing in principle but not in wording). The issue at hand is "it doesn't help enough of the population" isn't a real argument in this area. There are issues where that is a valid concern, but I highly doubt there is a state, even a city, where that's true about support for abused women (to PREVENT it from happening again).


I don't know how many of you watch ever trash talk shows, but you know the (not particular, but many of the same type) girl who's on Springer weekly complaining that her boyfriend cheats on her and abuses her verbally/emotionally/physically who, when told to just leave him says, "But I love him".
Nothing is going to prevent what has already happened to this girl. She has been abused and no program is a time machine. However, with the proper support programs that girl can get help and there's a WAY better chance of her getting out of that relationship than having the crowd at Maury yell at her.

While it's true that the programs still may not help, it's even truer that with no program the government has said she's not worth helping. People not worth helping are very few and very far between.