immigrants and domestic violence in charlotte …€¦ · are places where immigrants may feel safe...

1

IMMIGRANTS AND DOMESTIC VIOLENCE IN CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBURG

By Dr. Claire Schuch, Melissa Siegel-Barrios, Stefania Arteaga, Betsabe Rojas, Zeke Van Dehy

and Tahlia Hanna-Martinez

November 2019

Project Summary

This report examines domestic violence (DV) among immigrants - particularly those who are

undocumented - in Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina. We set out to investigate four main

questions. To answer these questions, we collected data from the Charlotte Mecklenburg Police

Department (CMPD), the Mecklenburg County Court, and various domestic violence and

immigrant-serving organizations. We also interviewed 12 local experts.

1. What are the estimates of immigrants going through the reporting and legal action DV

processes in Mecklenburg County, and how has this changed over time?

Data obtained for this report was informative but found inconclusive to answer this question. It

appears that the number DV cases reported to CMPD has been steadily increasing the past 15

years, likely as a result of the overall population increase. However, a slight decrease from

2017-2019 was noted overall in DV criminal court cases, especially among Latinos or

individuals with foreign last names. Since 2011, it has become more difficult to get a U-visa

because there are fewer local certifiers, victims are more frequently discouraged to apply, and

the USCIS processing time can be around a decade.

While we anticipated it would be difficult to offer accurate estimates based on

undocumented immigrants being a ‘hidden’ population in data collection (i.e. data on

immigration status is typically not collected), this was not the only challenge we faced.

Additional difficulties in answering this question are:

● Knowing exactly what data each entity has, including which variables they measure, and

for what time frames.

● Obtaining requested data from different organizations. Some sources did not provide

(comprehensive) data. Generally, the main issue was not a lack of willingness but rather

lack of response about the data they agreed to provide or responding with only partial

data.

● Piecing the data together. No single organization has all the relevant data. We tried to

collect data that were complementary and, together, depicted a clearer picture of the

topic, but gaps remained.

● The data that were obtained were sometimes unreliable due to changes and

inconsistencies in data collection and variables over time, making it difficult to draw

conclusions about what trends are occurring.

Consequently, while we believe the quantitative data in this report are informative, the

qualitative data in this study were more reliable and comprehensive overall in terms of

answering our research questions.

2

2. What is the process for reporting DV and pursuing legal action in Mecklenburg County?

As demonstrated in our flow chart (figure 9), there are various start and end points when it

comes to reporting DV and pursuing legal action. The main entities involved in these processes

are CMPD, the Courts, the Magistrate’s Office, Safe Alliance, Community Support Services, and

the DV Healthcare Project at Atrium. Referrals are made to these services (e.g. by local

community organizations), within these services, and by these services (e.g. to CCLA). Most of

these services have Spanish-language staff or interpreters. For other languages, a phone

interpretation system may be used.

3. What challenges do undocumented immigrants specifically encounter in these

processes?

There are an array of challenges people face when reporting and pursuing legal action for DV.

Some of these challenges apply to all victims; many Mecklenburg County residents are unaware

of the DV services available and how to navigate them. In the process of seeking services, they

may face difficulties with transportation, child care, and work schedules. Foreign-born residents

may face additional challenges, such as language and cultural barriers, different cultural

understanding of what DV is, and stereotyping by authorities. Undocumented immigrants are

particularly vulnerable to DV and fearful of reporting and pursuing legal action because the lack

of trust in authorities and fear of deportation of the victim and/or the perpetrator.

4. What can be done to make the system more navigable for immigrants?

Immigrant communities in Charlotte-Mecklenburg should be informed on what DV is and what

services are available to them in ways that are culturally aware and recognize the fears of

deportation. This requires entities such as Safe Alliance, CSS and the CMPD DV unit to invest

in community education and engagement efforts. Professionals serving DV victims should be

trained on a regular basis on how to deal specifically with immigrant and undocumented clients,

since they have unique experiences and backgrounds. At the same time, immigrant-serving

community organizations such as Project 658, the Latin American Coalition and immigrant

respective faith communities can benefit from training on how to assist DV victims since these

are places where immigrants may feel safe to disclose DV. More broadly, reducing anti-

immigrant laws and creating more welcoming, immigrant-inclusive environments will help

reduce fear among undocumented immigrants, making them more likely in general to cooperate

and engage with DV services and local law enforcement.

3

Contributors

Claire Schuch, Ph.D., is a National Science Foundation postdoctoral fellow at the University of

North Carolina at Charlotte and the lead on this study. For the past eight years, she has initiated

and contributed to studies about Latinx health, entrepreneurship, civic engagement, labor

market access, and inclusion in Charlotte-Mecklenburg, in collaboration with local residents and

community-based organizations. An immigrant to the US, Claire has lived in the UK, the

Netherlands, Singapore, Chile and Minnesota prior to arriving in Charlotte.

Stefania Arteaga is an organizer based out of Charlotte, North Carolina who focuses on the

expansion of the deportation pipeline in local communities through ICE/local law enforcement

collaboration. Stefania has worked on campaigns for education access for undocumented

students in NC, deportation defense campaigns, and most recently, a successful anti-287g

campaign in Mecklenburg County. She is the co-founder of Comunidad Colectiva, a grassroots

immigrant rights organization group that organizes for pro-immigrant policies in Mecklenburg

County, the Immigrant Rights' Organizer for the ACLU of NC, and the recipient of the 2019 Z

Smith Reynolds foundation All for NC fellowship.

Melissa Siegel Barrios is an expert on domestic violence and teen dating violence and currently

works as an evaluation consultant with NC Coalition against Domestic Violence (NCCADV) and

NC Coalition against Sexual Assault (NCCASA). Melissa brings knowledge about the DV

landscape (entities, experts, policies) in Charlotte-Mecklenburg.

Betsabe Rojas is an undergraduate research assistant for the University of North Carolina at Charlotte. After being selected to participate with the 2019 Charlotte Community Scholars program, she was matched to work with Dr. Claire Schuch on her domestic violence research project. Being an immigrant herself, this project was special for her because of how it relates to her personal story and family. She is currently a sophomore studying pre-business in the honors business program and a Martin Scholar at UNCC. Zeke Van Dehy is a UNC Charlotte Levine Scholar working on a degree in Computer Science.

During the 2018-2019 academic year, Zeke assisted with developing research materials and the

IRB, analyzing U visa data, attending stakeholder interviews, summarizing interview data, and

gathering relevant background materials.

Tahlia Hanna-Martinez is a senior at Cornell University where she is majoring in Development

Sociology. She was selected for a 2019 Summer Research Experience for Undergraduates in

Charlotte through a collaboration of three institutions: Davidson College, Johnson C. Smith

University, and University of North Carolina Charlotte. Through this program’s network she was

able to meet Dr. Claire Schuch and join the research team.

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the individuals and organizations who were willing to meet with us for

interviews and/or share their data.

4

INTRODUCTION

On July 9th, 2018, Maria and her 16-year-old son were detained by Immigration and Customs

Enforcement (ICE) officers in the Mecklenburg County courthouse. Maria, a domestic violence

survivor, chose to report her abuser and took legal action. She was in the domestic violence

courtroom floor when she was followed and detained by Immigration and Customs Enforcement

(ICE). As the National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild (2018) reported: “The

arrests of Maria and her son sparked a national outcry over the chilling effects of ICE

courthouse arrests on violence survivors and the criminal justice system. Additionally, the

arrests coincide with a national effort by ICE to step up enforcement at courthouses across the

country, in spite of multiple studies showing that such courthouse arrests make victims,

witnesses and defendants are less willing to seek protection and pursue justice.” As of

November 2019, New York, Oregon and Massachusetts are the only two states preventing ICE

from entering the courthouses.

Maria’s case sparked a need to look more closely into the processes, options, and challenges

that undocumented immigrants face when victim to domestic violence. This led to the research

presented in this report. The main questions are:

1. What are the estimates of undocumented immigrants going through the reporting

and legal action DV processes in Mecklenburg County, and how has this

changed over time?

2. What is the process for reporting domestic violence and pursuing legal action in

Mecklenburg County?

3. What challenges do undocumented immigrants specifically encounter in these

processes?

4. What can be done to make the system more navigable for immigrants?

Findings presented in this report are derived from data of several Charlotte-Mecklenburg public

offices and programs, including data on U-Visa certifications applications and domestic violence

court cases. We also conducted interviews with 12 local experts working in the areas of

immigration and domestic violence. This data was collected between September 2018 and July

2019. Though this work is ongoing, the goal of this report is to present what we have learned so

far and encourage actions and conversations around this topic.

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

In the US, an estimated 1 in 4 women and 1 in 9 men experience DV (NCADV). According to

the 2010-2012 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS), an estimated

47% of men and women will be victims of psychological aggression by an intimate partner in

their lifetime. 32% of women will be victims of physical violence, and 16% of sexual violence by

an intimate partner (NCVRW 2018). An estimated 80% of victims do not receive services from

victim service agencies. Although all victims of DV are vulnerable to harm from their offender,

undocumented female immigrants are a particularly vulnerable population experiencing DV. A

variety of factors unique to this population work in concert to prevent them from reporting their

perpetrators and/or accessing necessary resources.

5

The fear of deportation is the greatest barrier preventing undocumented women from reporting abuse to the authorities (Erez 2000, 2009; Menjívar & Salcido, 2002; Rodriguez 2000; Reina & Lohman, 2015; Vidales, 2010). Especially since the election of President Trump, law enforcement officials across the country have noted a decrease in the numbers of immigrants reporting domestic violence. They attribute this to a growing fear of deportation amid the current anti-immigrant socio-political agenda of the Trump administration (Medina, 2017). In May 2019, out of a coalition of over 600 advocates and attorneys from different national organizations, 76.25% reported that immigrant survivors fear contacting the police, believing that, “any contact with law enforcement puts them in a more dangerous position than staying silent” (Tahirih Justice Center, 2019). Indeed, 52% of the advocates experienced their clients drop their cases due to fear of deportation (Tahirih Justice Center, 2019). Meanwhile, the Trump administration has zeroed in on toughening immigration through encouraging local law enforcement officers to become involved in federal immigration enforcement (287(g) Program, special ordering agreements, etc.), eliminating reasonable deportation priorities, adopting “zero tolerance” prosecution, separating and detaining families, and narrowing pathways to asylum. These policy changes have created a chilling effect amongst immigrants, contributing to a dangerous climate of fear where undocumented immigrants avoid engagements with authorities at all costs (Advocate Survey). The 287 (g) program has a particularly strong impact on preventing immigrant survivors from seeking legal assistance. The 287 (g) Program is an agreement between local law enforcement agencies and ICE to develop a partnership in which crime and immigration control responsibilities are shared, as well as enabling state and local law enforcement officials to carry out civil immigration enforcement (Nguyen & Gill, 2010). As of July 2019, ICE has 287(g) agreements with 79 law enforcement agencies across 21 states (U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement). North Carolina consistently ranks amongst the highest of all the states in its cooperation with ICE and its implementation of 287 (g) Program and is only second to Texas in the highest number of County 287 (g) agreements across the country (Nguyen & Gill, 2010; Schindler, 2018). Indeed, Mecklenburg County was a long-term signatory to 287 (g), causing over 16,000 people to be processed for deportation over the past 13 years; however, upon the election of Sheriff Garry McFadden in December 2018, the county’s voluntary participation with 287(g) was halted. Nevertheless, ending cooperation does not prevent ICE from executing raids in Mecklenburg County and may even provoke them to target the county more (De La Canal, 2018). One avenue of protection for immigrant survivors of DV is the U-Visa Program under the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA).1 The U-Visa Program was put in place in order to provide undocumented immigrants who witnessed or were victim to a crime (including DV) an opportunity to apply for legal residency, under the conditions that they are willing to participate in the investigation and/or prosecution processes of the alleged criminal (Department of Homeland Security). However, the probability of crossing paths with the Secure Communities of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) increases during legal processes, causing the applicant for the U-Visa to be at risk for deportation (Gill, 2012; Murshid & Bowen, 2018). Furthermore, if their application for a U-Visa is denied they are also at risk for deportation (Murshid & Bowen, 2018).

1 VAWA is in its 25th year and is due for reauthorization. The House reauthorized the Violence Against Women Act with bipartisan support, passing H.R. 1585. But Senate leaders refuse to bring the bill for a vote. For more information, visit https://www.renewvawa.org/.

https://www.renewvawa.org/

6

Still, little is known about what undocumented domestic violence survivors’ options are when

reporting or pursuing legal action. For that reason, we take a closer look at this, specifically in

Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina. The unique combination of positionalities of the team

that put together this report allowed us to gain access and insight into the system and

processes at play.

The focus of this study is on Latino and undocumented immigrants, but we want to be clear

upfront that the two are not interchangeable. Estimates suggest that around 82% of

undocumented migrants are from Latin America (King & Punti, 2012), over 83% of the 57 million

Latinos in the US are documented. Using 2012-2016 Census data, the Migration Policy Institute

estimated there are approximately 11.3 million undocumented migrants in the US, about

321,000 living in North Carolina (86% from Latin America) and an estimated 53,000 in

Mecklenburg County (82% from Latin America). The data in the report are often from Latino or

non-English speaking individuals since accurate data on undocumented individuals is rare.

METHODS

This section outlines the various forms of data we collected and our process of obtaining those

data.

Public Records Request

Public records requests are all the information created or received by government agencies are

considered public record and available for public inspection unless specifically exempted by law.

This means that residents can request data from agencies such as police departments,

courthouses’, and magistrates’ offices. As part of this project, we set out to obtain information

about domestic violence cases from the Charlotte-Mecklenburg police department, the

Mecklenburg courthouse, and the magistrates' office. This process deemed more challenging

than anticipated. First, it was hard to determine exactly what data was collected by each of

these institutions. For instance, we did not know what demographic information they collected

from victims and perpetrators and any other information in their notes. Second, it was

challenging to figure out who to best reach out to within these agencies. When we reached out

to the organizations, we were redirected to another person who could once again redirect us a

second time. Or we were asked to fill out online data request forms that were not followed up

about, even after emailing and calling multiple times over the course of several months. We also

faced lags in response time, which drew out the data request process. We additionally had

responses where we received partial data or only a specific question was answered. Though we

recognize that these agencies are all busy serving the public, we find it concerning that public

record are in reality so difficult to obtain. Third, it is difficult to obtain accurate data on domestic

violence and undocumented immigrants for several reasons. a) Domestic violence is not a

specific crime or charge listed in police records, rather domestic violence cases will often be

written as “strangulation,”2 “communicating threats,” “violation of 50b” and/or “assault on a

female.” Such charges do not necessarily mean there is a domestic violence case. b) Agencies

2 Strangulation charges have not been used a lot in DV research but has been a local focus in relation to DV.

7

do not collect information about people’s documentation status, this is a positive thing. Though it

does make it more difficult to know how many victims and perpetrators are indeed

undocumented. Similarly, language or other potential indicators of immigrant background are

not collected. Again, this is positive because it makes the victims feel safer, but it does mean

the only possible indication of immigrant background is racial/ethnic categories and in some

cases, names. c) It appears that agencies only have data available from the last couple of

years. We originally wanted to look at a broader timeframe, for instance, 2000-2019 to account

for different federal administrations. However, we were unable to do this because of this limited

time range in the available data.

Since we did not know exactly what court data were available and had difficulty obtaining it, we

visited the County clerk's office in person to review docket information. We requested DV court

cases for the first two weeks of March and May in 2017, 2018, and 2019 (these were the only

available years) in order to make a comparison over time. We selected March and May because

we wanted to ensure we had three years of data (June 2019 onwards was not available yet) and

we know that the November-January holidays elevates DV cases. We specifically looked at the

occurrence of possible foreign last names and documented on the notes made on the case,

such as exact charge, whether the case was heard, or if there was a prosecuting witness

present. We recognize the potential inaccuracy of using last names as a proxy for immigrant

background, but no demographic information was available. Also, in the context of Charlotte,

which is a newer immigrant gateway city, we know that many immigrants are first-generation

migrants unlike places like Texas and California that commonly have multi-generational

migrants.

We put in a data request to the NC Courts system via an online portal to obtain domestic

violence related data. Within two weeks we received a text file with all criminal charges from

2014-2018. We converted the text file into an excel spreadsheet and were able to filter out

domestic violence-related cases through a column that indicated whether the charge was DV

related. Out of the 855,963 charges there were 35,478 (4.1%) that were DV related. We ran

descriptive statistics on this subset of data.

Interviews from local experts

In order to gain insight into the options and services available for domestic violence survivors,

we decided to interview individuals who work for local DV agencies as well as those working

with law enforcement, legal services and immigrant-serving organizations who come in contact

with DV cases. We identified these individuals through our professional networks. In order to

protect their identities, their names are not disclosed in this report. All interviews took place in

person at the workplace of the interviewees, except for one interview that occurred over the

phone. Interviews lasted 45-70 minutes and were audio recorded to ensure we had an accurate

record of what was said.

Experts were asked to describe their role within their organization, the clientele they serve, and

estimates of their immigrant and undocumented clients. They were asked to speak about the

process for people reporting DV and how it is handled in their specific agency, e.g., what

8

resources they have available, advice or referrals they give. They were asked about whether

they had seen changes over time and immigrant, undocumented, or non-English speaking

clients and what they attributed those specific changes as well. They were asked about their

organizations capacity to deal with culturally and linguistically diverse clients. For those who are

involved with the U-Visa process, we asked about the process of applying for a U-Visa and how

this process may have changed over time. Lastly, we asked interviewees to think about what

can be done to better serve the immigrant and undocumented community. Interview materials

were approved by the UNC Charlotte institutional review board.

Data from local programs and agencies

We asked the people we interviewed to provide relevant data from their programs that may give

us insight into the statistics of immigrant clients and trends over time. Similar to the public

records data request, we ran into difficulty with what data is collected, accuracy, consistency

over time, and the ability to look at trends beyond the past couple of years.

FINDINGS

In order to clarify the context, we first provide an overview of the main organizations serving DV

victims and their role in the local landscape based on what we learned from their websites,

handouts and conversations with representatives. We subsequently present findings to our four

main study objectives based on data collected through interviews and data requests from local

agencies. Please note that the findings reported are reported to the best of our knowledge at the

time (November 2019). Processes and policies may change over time.

Local DV Services

A DV case most commonly comes to the attention of local authorities through CMPD, i.e. a 911

call. The responding officers are trained to respond to DV calls with the most caution because

they are the deadliest to police officers. For this reason, there are always at least two officers

dispatched to every DV call. Officers then assess the situation and separate the parties

involved. If there is a language barrier, officers are to wait till a CMPD interpreter arrives and will

only use family members as interpreters in emergency situations. CMPD officers are expected

to offer information on domestic violence services and submit their report. If it is a misdemeanor

case, the report gets assigned back to the officer who handles the criminal side of the case

which then goes to DA. In severe cases, the report is sent immediately to the DV Special

Victims Unit (SVU).

The CMPD SVU DV unit has its own sergeant, detectives, advocates and support staff. Once a

report is received by the DV unit sergeant, it is assigned to an advocate. Advocates will reach

out to inform victims of available services and attempts to help connect victims to appropriate

community resources. It can be challenging to reach victims because they may not pick up the

phone or decide not to pursue further action. The advocate will help victim with paperwork, go to

court with them, refer the case to the DA if necessary, and attempt to maintain contact. The

detective assigned to the case will administer witness statement. After collecting medical and

crime scene information for the case, the DA “papering” process begins. The detective then

decides if there is enough information for the case to move forward. If the victim and/or

9

perpetrator are uncooperative the case becomes more challenging. However, the case can

proceed without the victim if the State determines offenses are sufficiently egregious. Cases can

take from a few months to a few years. The CMPD unit is trying to become more well-known in

the immigrant and overall local communities, e.g. by hiring bilingual officers and having officers

engage in neighborhood events.

Another place where a DV situation may come to light is in a hospital setting. Safe Alliance and

Carolinas Healthcare System (now Atrium Health) partnered to create the Domestic Violence

Healthcare Project (DVHP) services including assessing lethality of relationship (how

dangerous), safety planning, photographing injuries, documenting exhibited characters of power

and control, and educating victim of additional resources available within the community. For

immigrants who disclose they are undocumented, safety planning includes pre-identifying child

care alternatives in case they are detained by ICE. If the victim does not come through CMPD,

then DVHP is only obligated to report to law enforcement if the victim was assaulted with a gun,

knife, or has major injuries (they will most likely be in the emergency department). Most victims

feel more comfortable disclosing violence in a comfortable environment. DVHP professionals

have seen many cases, especially for Latina DV survivors, come from OBGYN and the post-

partum department. All patients are screened for history of intimate partner violence (IPV) and

current safety concerns. Patients that screen positive are referred to DVHP. Latina DV survivors

were found to primarily screen positive from OBGYN and Postpartum departments. Aside from

aiding victims, the DVHP also tracks trends (race, ethnicity, etc.) and reports to community

partners.

Mecklenburg County’s main DV service organizations are Safe Alliance and Mecklenburg

County Community Support Services Prevention and Intervention Services (CSS). Safe Alliance

offers a variety of programs and services, including the Victim Assistance Court Program and

Legal Representation Program (VACP/LRP) to support victims of DV and SA who seek 50b,

DVPOs, 50c or 50ds. Safe Alliance, VACP/LRP court advocates staff will provide assistance in

filling out 50b DVPO paperwork and then have a staff attorney review the 50b DVPO paperwork

before filing it at the civil clerk’s office. They also provide crisis intervention, take photos of

injuries, safety plan, accompany victims to court, educate them on the court process and

provide emotional support during civil and criminal proceedings. Safe Alliance VACP/LRP staff

and pro bono attorneys provide free legal advice or representation to those seeking a 50b

DVPO, and to those renewing an expiring DVPO. VACP/LRP has Spanish-speaking advocates

and attorneys available to provide services to Spanish-speaking victims. Staff will provide

appropriate referral information to victims seeking immigration assistance.

Safe Alliance also has a Domestic Violence shelter for individuals experiencing IPV who are in

imminent danger. Each family's needs are assessed individually, and service plans are

developed accordingly; therefore, each individual has a different time limit in their shelter stay.

During their stay, DV survivors are offered services that include counseling, support groups,

individual advocacy, and career planning services. In most cases they help with filling out the

paperwork for emergency protective orders and, if needed, go to the courthouse with them to

provide further help. Once the victim has to go back to court to testify, staff members are

available to arrange emotional support for them victims and are permitted to sit with victims as

10

they testify at their ex parte hearing. Safe Alliance offers victims assistance programs in

Spanish and referrals to immigration assistance if deemed appropriate. There are also Spanish

speaking staff within the shelter to provide emotional support and assistance to Spanish-

speaking victims. The CMPD DV Unit, Safe Alliance and the DVHP are in daily communication

with one another to collaborate on providing the best services for victims.

CSS gets involved after, not during, a crisis DV situation. CSS offers adult services which

include individual and group counseling for DV victims (in English and Spanish), counseling and

advocacy information to teen victims of dating violence, and individual and group counseling

sessions for children who have witnessed or experienced DV. CSS hosts a supervised visitation

and safe exchange center where victims and perpetrators can arrange to meet for custody

ordered visits and/or exchanges. CSS also maintains the NOVA (New Options for Violent

Action) program, which is a batterers intervention program to work with perpetrators to take

accountability for their actions and choose to change their behaviors. NOVA participation is

usually court-ordered but people can also enroll voluntarily. NOVA has Spanish-speaking staff.

For clients speaking other languages, they can utilize professional interpreter services. The cost

of the interpreter services falls on the client, unless they are involved with Youth and Family

Services. YFS receives different funding and can cover the interpreter costs.

Estimates of undocumented immigrants going through the reporting and legal action DV

processes and how this has changed over time

As mentioned, it is difficult to get accurate data on the number of undocumented migrants

experiencing DV because it is heavily underreported and, when people do seek help, CMPD

and service organizations do not ask about documentation status. This is positive, because

asking this would further marginalize undocumented individuals, but it does make it practically

impossible to know the number of undocumented migrants experiencing DV and going through

the reporting process and seeking legal action. That said, Mecklenburg County has about a

million residents, of which approximately 155,000 are foreign-born (55,000 of whom are

naturalized US citizens), 130,000 are Latino and 53,000 are undocumented (US Census 2017).

Overall, the estimated prevalence of DV in the general US population is about 1 in 4 and an

estimated 30% report. This could help us calculate estimates of foreign-born, Latino and

undocumented DV rates, though because of the barriers and fear, we anticipate reporting rates

to be lower than for the general US population.

DV Prevalence in Mecklenburg County

CMPD receives about 40,000 911 DV calls per year, of which about 9,000 lead to a criminal

report being filed. These numbers have been fairly consistent over the past 15 years, despite

population increases. The number of DV orders received and served, and protective orders

have seen increases between 2012 and 2017 (table 1). About 3,000 lethality assessments are

administered annually, of which about 1,700 scored high risk. These screenings are part of the

Lethality Assessments Program (LAP) which aims to educate intimate partner violence victims

about risk factors for homicide and to connect them with support and safety planning services.

The lethality screening is an 11-item survey that assesses the victim-survivor's level of risk for

being killed by the DV offender. After the initial officer report, about half (48%) of the cases are

11

cleared by arrest and another 22.6% ‘exceptionally cleared’ which typically means victim didn’t

prosecute.

We made repeated attempts to obtain Domestic Violence Protective Orders (DVPO) data from

Mecklenburg County but did not receive any data as of early November 2019.

Table 1: Overview of CMPD DV data from the DV data warehouse, 2012-2017 (limited data available for

2012)

2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Simple assault 4958 4997 4946 5583 5249

Communicating threats 1232 1212 1063 1061 1217 1045

Protective orders 2934 2898 3111 3170 3396

DV orders received 3681 3551 3395 3727 4499 4496

DV orders served 2871 2890 2889 2889 3277 3447

Adult DV Victims 968 1050 1037 1100 1155

Child Witnesses 505 774 692 482 562

12

Figure 1 shows DV victim’s race/ethnicity between 2002 and 2019 (Asian excluded because the

numbers were very low). Not all 2019 data is included yet, since we received the data in

September. Overall, DV numbers have been fluctuating but are fairly steady over the years.

Most victims were African American. The number of Latino victims has shown an overall

increase since 2005. We suspect this can be explained by the overall Latino population increase

in the county.

Figure 1: DV victim’s race/ethnicity, 2005-2019 (CMPD data)

Figure 2 is based on the gender of the victims. As anticipated, the share of female victims is

significantly higher than male victims but we should not forget that men can also be victims of

DV. The percentage of victims in a dating relationship (as opposed to being married) has been

higher in 2018 and 2019 than in previous years.

Figure 2: DV victims by gender, 2005-2019 (CMPD data)

13

DV Criminal Data

Of the 35,379 DV cases in Mecklenburg County from 2014 to 2018, 1,939 cases had a Latino

defendant. That is 5.5% of cases, which means the rate of Latino cases is lower than expected,

since Hispanics make up 11% of the county’s adult population (US Census 2017). Of these

35,479 DV cases, 84.2% of defendants were male and 15.8% were female. 72.3% of

defendants were Black, 19.0% White, 5.5% Hispanic and 0.8% Asian (2.1% was ‘unknown’).

583 cases (1.7%) required an interpreter, 524 of which were Spanish. Other languages included

American Sign Language (17 cases), Burmese (10), Nepalese (9), Vietnamese (8), Arabic (6),

Portuguese (6), French (2), and Creole (1).

Of all DV cases, 342 various charges were listed, though some were very similar in nature. The

most common charges were: “assault on a female” (32.3%), “communicating threats” (10.3%),

“simple assault” (9.3%), “DV protective order violation” (8.0%), “assault by strangulation” (4.0%),

“assault with a deadly weapon” (4.0%)

In terms of only the cases with Hispanic defendants, 85.4% were male and 14.6% female. The

number of cases was 186 in 2014, 345 in 2015, 468 in 2016, 466 in 2017 and 474 in 2018

(figure 3). The most common charges were similar to the overall cases: “assault on a female”

(33.8%), “simple assault” (11.4%), “communicating threats” (5.5%), “DV protective order

violation” (5.0%), “assault by strangulation” (4.3%), “assault with a deadly weapon” (3.4%). We

are unsure exactly why the 2014 number of Hispanic defendants was much lower than the other

years. It may be due to the way Hispanic as a group is being collected/recorded.

Figure 3: Mecklenburg County DV cases by year by race/ethnicity, 2014-2018 (Black, Hispanic, White)

DV Courtroom Docket Data

Tables 2 and 3 show a 25% decrease in the number of possible immigrants and Latinos

involved with DV-related charges between 2017 and 2019 from the March and May samples

combined. That said, the overall number of DV court cases also declined (table 4) and the

estimated immigrant percent stays fairly consistent from 2017 to 2019. The percent of cases

where there was no prosecuting witness dropped slightly but the change was not statistically

14

significant. The majority of the foreign names were Spanish (table 3). In 4 of our sample dockets

in 2017, 5 in 2018, and 1 in 2019 there was a specific mention in the notes that the defendant

was deported or in ICE custody. All these cases had a Spanish last name. We were also able to

see who did not have a driver’s license, which may be an indicator of being undocumented,

since North Carolina does not provide licenses to individuals without a social security number.

Table 2: Number of DV criminal court charges where the defendant and/or victim’s name is possibly

foreign (e.g. Chun, Abdul, Martinez) and number without a driver’s license (PW= prosecuting witness)

2017 2018 2019

March 1-14 30 (13 no license) 33% No PW

33 (14 no license) 30% No PW

30 (19 no license) 23.5% No PW

May 1-14 40 (20 no license) 17.5% No PW



Total March & May 71 (34 no license) 25% No PW



Table 3: Number of DV criminal court charges where the defendant and/or victim’s name is Spanish (e.g.

Gonzales, Ramirez)

2017 2018 2019

March 1-14 27 (12 no license) 26% No PW

21 (11 no license) 28.5% No PW


May 1-14 30 (19 no license) 16% No PW



Total March & May 58 (32 no license) 21% No PW



Table 4: Total numbers of domestic violence cases between 2017 and 2019, including those with possibly

foreign last names

2017 2018 2019

March 1-14 468 (20% No PW) 6% foreign

400 (20% No PW) 8% foreign


May 1-14 510 (15% No PW) 8% foreign

436 (23% No PW) 7.5% foreign


Total March & May 978 (17% No PW) 7% foreign



These data give us estimates about the number of immigrants, Latinos and undocumented

perpetrators and victims. The reason we do not see major changes between 2017 and 2019

15

could be because our sample size is relatively small (four weeks out of the year) and because

there were only data on 2017, 2018 and 2019, and not further back. In terms of the federal

government, this only covers the most recent (Trump) presidency.

While spending time at the Clerk of Court’s office, one of our researchers overheard a lawyer

talking to a court employee that their client was hesitant to show up because of fear of ICE,

even though the lawyer reassured him they were not at the Courthouse. The Court employee

said he has seen ICE agents there a few times but not recently. The client ended up not

showing up because he did not want to risk getting deported.

U-visa certification data

Using U-visa certification data obtained from the Mecklenburg Courts, we found a total number

of 860 U-visa certifications were denied and 890 were approved from 2011 to 2018 (this means

the approval proportion was 0.49) (figure 4). To clarify, these are certifications that were

approved or denied by law enforcement (North Carolina is the only US state that does not allow

judges to certify U-visas) and submitted to the federal government (USCIS). Over time, the

number of denials increased significantly around 2014-2015 and then fell again. The number of

approvals was more stable but saw an increase in 2018. The certification approval proportion

decreased from 2011 to 2014 and then increased from 2014 to 2018.

Figure 4: Visa approval and denial data per year, 2011-2018 (Court data)

16

Using U-visa certifications from CMPD, we found that there was a 41% decrease in the number

of submissions from 1012 applications in 2014 to 589 in 2018 (figure 5). We anticipate this is

because key informants told us there are now fewer people who certify U-visas and victims are

discouraged to apply because they are told it is difficult to get approved once certified and

submitted. Only about 10,000 U-visas are granted a year in the US and if case is denied, there

is a risk of deportation.

Figure 5: Number of U-visa certification requests per year (CMPD data), 2014-2018

Figure 6 illustrates the number of approved and denied U visas per year from 2014 to 2018,

according to CMPD data. Here, we see both the number of approved and denied cases, and the

approval proportions declining over time. The number of approvals experienced a sharp decline

of 77%. This matches what we see in the Court U visa data and may be related to the change in

presidency. It is important to note that the certification process with CMPD may take weeks to a

month(s), however, having United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (the adjudicating

body of that determine whether someone will be granted the immigration status or not) has a

backlog of 239,933 cases as of FY Fiscal Year 2019, Quarter 2. Therefore, rather than

calculating which percent of applications from a certain year were approved that year would be

misleading. Instead, we report the number of applications per year separate from the proportion

between approved and denied decisions.

17

Figure 6: Proportion between approved and denied submissions per year, 2014-2018 (CMPD data)

Safe Alliance data

Figure 7 shows an overview of the total number of Safe Alliance clients per fiscal year (July 1st

through June 30th) for 2014 through 2018, as well as the number of Latino and non-English

speaking clients and how many of the total clients had children. We see slight increases over

time in each of the categories. For the non-English speaking clients, the majority spoke

Spanish, with an additional 1-3 annual cases of French, Burmese, Nepali, Arabic, Mandarin

Chinese, and Vietnamese.

Figure 7: Safe Alliance client data, 2014-2018

18

Figure 8 shows what number and portion of Safe Alliance clients arrive directly at Safe Alliance

VACP/LRP and how many are referred by CMPD, the hospital, community support services and

‘other.’ The ‘other’ category encompasses numerous referring partners, including attorneys,

District Attorney’s Office, Sheriff’s Department, counselors, family/friends, DSS, and the Civil

Clerk’s Office, Self-Serve Center, and a wide range of other referring persons/agencies. The

total referral numbers are higher than the client numbers because Safe Alliance, VACP/LRP

documents when a person comes into their office, even if they do not become a client. The

reason for the significant jump in numbers in 2018 (especially in the ‘other’ category) is because

of better data collection and enhanced efforts to ask each person seeking services how they

heard about Safe Alliance, VACP/LRP.

Figure 8: Safe Alliance referral sources, fiscal years 2014-2018

The Domestic Violence Healthcare Project (DVHP) does not ask or track whether clients are

undocumented, but if this is disclosed, they will ensure them they are safe and that they are

protected by the laws of the United States. DVHP collects data on ethnicity and language. For

immigrant clients determined to be lawfully present, DVHP staff may refer clients to, e.g.,

Project 658 (local immigrant-serving non-profit), Battered Immigrant Project, and/or CCLA

Healthcare Navigators.

The process for reporting domestic violence and pursuing legal action in Mecklenburg

County

Figure 9 shows the options available to DV survivors who are reporting and seeking legal

action. In many cases, the victim may not be ready or know about official resources, so they will

confide in a church leader or someone at a community organization. This can be helpful in

19

terms of receiving support, a listening ear, and information about other options. For instance,

the Latin American Coalition, offers one-on-one consultation to identify the needs of the

individual who has experienced or is experiencing domestic violence. They help the victim

create a safety plan (where can they go stay, who they can call if they are in danger, who their

children can stay with, etc.) and ensure their basic needs are met (food, shelter, rent, Verizon

Hopeline phones with prepaid minutes). They can also make referrals to Safe Alliance, free

counseling through the Mecklenburg County CSS Confianza program, low-cost clinics, housing

and legal services. Many service providers such as Crisis Assistance will waive the regular

requirements if there is a current DV situation. That said, many community members and non-

DV service providers are not trained or knowledgeable about how to appropriately handle DV

cases and local available services.

In some cases, a victim will go directly to Safe Alliance or CSS to seek help, where staff will

help them make a safety plan, get counseling, and take additional steps, such as filing a 50b

Domestic Violence Protective Order (DVPO) or going to the shelter. DVPOs are civil, rather than

criminal, proceedings. There are three types of DVPOS in North Carolina (50b, 50c and 50d3),

but 50b is the most common for domestic violence. That said, most individuals are referred to

Safe Alliance and CSS by an initial point of contact with law enforcement or the hospital. If a

911 call is made and DV is involved, the officer will examine evidence and decide whether an

arrest is made. If an arrest is not made, officers are trained to provide a list of resources and try

to defuse the situation by encouraging the couple to take some (temporary) physical distance

(i.e. one person leaves the house). If an arrest is made, this will initiate the process of criminal

charges and a hearing in the DV criminal courtroom.

3 For more information about these types and the differences between them, see https://www.womenslaw.org/laws/nc/restraining-orders/all.

https://www.womenslaw.org/laws/nc/restraining-orders/all

20

Figure 9: Flow chart describing the processes for DV reporting and legal action in Mecklenburg Count

21

Figure 10 shows the informational card given to Spanish-speaking DV victims with an overview

of local services.

Figure 10: Handout with local DV resources and services

Challenges undocumented immigrants specifically encounter in these processes

This section outlines the challenges undocumented immigrants face as they decide to and go

about reporting and taking legal action on DV. This information was gathered through the

interviews with local experts and are broken down by area, similarly as on the flow chart above.

Some aspects may apply more broadly to DV victims, immigrants and non-English speakers

(i.e. they may not only apply to undocumented residents).

Disclaimer: We wish to acknowledge and applaud the tireless and important work that many

organizations across Charlotte-Mecklenburg are doing. Through this report, we learned a

number of things about challenges that victims of DV are facing and have included all of them

regardless of potentially conflicting information in different interviews. Our true goal in sharing

such challenges is to work together as a community to improve services offered to them. To that

22

effect, we have shared a list of recommendations as a part of this report.

Challenges with law enforcement: ● When an officer arrives, the victim may be weary to be removed from their homes and

taken to a shelter. ○ “They feel like they are being removed from their homes and not be able to come

back” (voluntary removal)

● Some officers are helpful and understanding, but others may be unsympathetic towards victims.

○ Calls and interviews with police can be invading in that it may be triggering for

survivors to speak about their abuse.

○ Stereotyping, racial prejudice, and sexism encountered by police or other

officials.

● Police reports are at the police officer’s discretion so they may choose not to make a report.

○ “Sometimes a police officer will be called out, but won’t make the police report”

○ “I had to go over to a sergeant to get the police report and I just could not

understand why”

● A victims’ injuries (e.g. strangulation) may not be physically visible at the time of the call, so the officer cannot make an arrest.

○ “Most victims don’t have hand marks on their necks, broken blood vessels, or are of darker complexion”

● Language may be a barrier if a bilingual staff-person is not on site. Meanwhile, while there are language-lines, these can be inconvenient to call in emergency situations, and the police departments may avoid their use due to cost. That can lead to officers using the abuser to translate if bilingual, or even, at times, a child.

○ “It’s hard enough to explain to someone else what has happened to you. Much less someone who doesn’t speak your language.”

○ “There is no rule to that (using children as translators) so yes you can but we

always say ideally don’t use children but if that's all you have than you use what

you have

○ “It takes a long time for us to get a translator and it costs more money”

○ “If it’s an emergency situation, then they will use the child (...) I have known

officers to do that before.”

○ “If it can be done over the phone [language line], then the officer will do it over

the phone.”

● Even once a criminal report is filed, it can be challenging for the CMPD DV unit to reach the victim because they may not pick up or decide not to seek services.

● Mistrust of police is prevalent, causing individuals to not make the call, especially if they are afraid to be deported. Today’s anti-immigrant socio-political climate may increase the fear immigrants have of police officers. Furthermore, individuals may not realize that the police in counties that do not implement 287(g) do not ask for documentation status.

○ “I’d rather live here and maybe get killed, than for sure get deported back home

and where I am going to get killed”

○ “People are being careful to not open the door for police”

○ “People just don’t trust the government right now”

23

○ “They [immigrants] do what they can to protect themselves and unfortunately that

means not calling the police when they have to”

Challenges with DV services: ● In some countries and cultures, DV is legal or more generally accepted and immigrants

may not know it is unlawful here in the US and what exactly qualifies as DV. ○ “Assaulting my wife or my partner is what we do where we’re from.”

○ “You are getting arrested for something you are accustomed to”

● A victim who speaks Spanish will meet with an available Spanish-speaking advocate. If all Spanish-speaking advocates are busy, the victim will have the choice to either work with the next available advocate through the language line or wait for a Spanish-speaking advocate.

○ “I’ve seen some ladies go there and come back with blank forms”

○ “Where is the translation line they are supposed to have?”

● If clients cannot provide an address where they can have the defendant served with a 50b DVPO they may not be assisted with completing the 50b DVPO paperwork but will be offered all of the available services. A valid address can include a home or work address, jail if the defendant is in custody, or an upcoming court date. The statute governing DVPOs and the US constitution requires that defendants be served with legal documents. The serving sheriffs need to be able to locate and serve defendants in order for the process to continue

○ “The people go there, and they told them that if they don’t have an address to

send the documents than they can’t file a complaint”

● Clients may only be partially helped with receiving the resources they need (e.g. receive help with hospital, therapy, etc. but do not get help filing for U-visa). VACP provides appropriate referrals to a victim needing immigration assistance.

○ “She went to court, she received therapy, she was in the hospital unconscious because of what happened, but she never received assistance for the U-Visa and I don’t understand why”

● Latina women may feel isolated, unwelcomed, and afraid at the shelter. The Shelter has Spanish-speaking staff as well as a language line to assist Spanish-speaking victims residing in the shelter.

○ “A group of females were so lost inside the shelter” ○ “Apparently the social worker who was bilingual and was supposed to work with

them, they did not have a good relationship with him” ○ “They do not feel supported because even the Spanish social worker that you

have isn't supporting you so how can I expect anyone else to” ○ “There was a lady with a work permit and social security and was still living in the

shelter because somehow she felt that she was still undocumented” ○ “Need to have a conversation with families so they know how long they can be

there” ● The shelter only has 120 beds and is full every day of the year. Victims may have to go

to shelters in other Counties. ● Staff turn-over, which results in a lack of consistency over time and need for continuous

training. ● Among immigrants, there may be a lack of knowledge that Safe Alliance and CSS are

available and how to access or navigate these free resources. ○ “Community education is one of the biggest barriers in Mecklenburg County”

● It can be emotionally draining.

24

○ “By the time they come here (Safe Alliance) they’ve already talked to at least one person about it”

Magistrate’s Office and Courthouse challenges:

● Paperwork has to be filled out correctly and independently, which may lead to problems and delays if it is not filled out right.

○ “They have to go straight to magistrate's office where they have to go through

gruesome paperwork”

○ “They’re sitting there for hours on end trying to fill out all this paperwork”

○ “Some people don’t even know what a protective order is”

● The process can be tedious if an individual does not have a car or has to bring their children along.

○ “They’re driving all over town and that’s not even counting if they’re able to drive themselves”

○ “They have to sometimes get kids to school and figure out who is going to pick them up from school (...) or they have little ones they have to drag around town”

● Can be emotionally draining to go through the process shortly after violent incident occurred.

○ “You are going through filling out all the forms and have no idea what’s going on because you have just gone through one of the most traumatic events in your life”

● If the paperwork is not filled out on time they may have to wait until the next day to be heard by a judge or VACP/LRP is available Monday through Friday from 8AM to 5PM to assist victims. After hours and on the weekend, a victim can call the Greater Charlotte Hopeline at 980-771-4673.

● If an individual requires a translator, it can hurt their credibility. ● The magistrate may steer people to only get a DVPO, instead of also helping them file

for criminal proceedings which can create significant obstacles for victims during the U-visa application process.

● If a victim doesn't come to criminal court, their case may be dismissed, and the DA won't sign the U-visa certification.

● Gender and power dynamics with law enforcement and in the Courts can be triggering. ○ “Those police, those judges, the magistrates, and the men who are in a position

of power behave in the same way your mate does.”

○ “You begin to be afraid of the men you come into contact with who are supposed

to be helping you”

● Sometimes victims are afraid of going to court. This corresponds with a Ceres Policy Research survey from 1000 people across 11 states which found that "41% of people from immigrant families avoid domestic violence-related hearings when they have been a victim" (Irvine et al. 2019).

○ Victims have been arrested at criminal court before (rarely, but still happens). ○ ICE has said that if they aren't allowed into jails, they're going to step up

courthouse arrests. ○ “The GOP, which is the party of small government, is trying to make sure the

federal government has more access to local and state resources to conduct ICE

activities”

● Many people do not know the magistrate has a translator. ● An interpreter may not be available, causing the victim to be left waiting all day to then

be told to come back tomorrow.

25

● Loss of wages or employment can occur if the legal process is causing the victim to miss multiple days of work.

○ “Now they’re picking between going to get the court order or keeping their job”

● Many people are not aware that they can go to the magistrate’s office to file for a DVPO. ○ “They work 24/7 and they really don’t go around their community to see the

resources”

Criminal and civil charges challenges:

● In order for the case to move forward, it is required that the defendant be served and receive their summons. However, oftentimes undocumented immigrants are well adept at keeping their location hidden, which may prove difficult in serving them, leading to case dismissal.

● There are several policies within the court system that create barriers for undocumented victims specifically.

○ If the defendant is deported before their summons it will be nearly impossible for the applicant to receive their U-Visa or DVPO.

○ “Those policies that are being put in place or not put in place, create a culture where it’s okay for there to be hate against this group of people”

● When the court cannot move forward with criminal charges because there is no defendant, then the charges are dismissed and cannot be brought back, therefore, if the perpetrator returns there is no legal protection for the victim.

○ “She was turned away because she did not have his address” ● Language and cultural barriers in court proceedings are heightened because even for

those who speak English there are difficulties navigating through the legal system. This intensifies for non-English speakers. Due to the different legal cultures in immigrants’ native countries, it makes it very difficult for them to navigate the system and get help.

● Pending federal public charge rule means undocumented immigrants are afraid of using public benefits and services (even if they are eligible for them) because they fear this may interfere with future chances of getting a visa.

● Sometimes people don't want to go through criminal proceedings because they don't want ICE to target the victim as being deported may lead them to be in a worse predicament than they are already in.

○ “I’d rather live here and maybe get killed, than for sure get deported back home


● A DVPO can hurt the defendants’ application if they are in the process of changing their immigration status.

● If purely civil, deportation is not likely to happen, but if they get arrested or put in criminal DV proceedings, ICE will find out and try to deport them. Even if the defendant has the charges against them dropped or before criminal court can even begin, ICE comes in and takes them.

● ICE can also deport the victims, regardless of their case status. ○ “The fact that on record, there has been a DV survivor who was picked up by

ICE”

○ “There’s always been mistrust of police with the communities of color, but I think

that the extra angle of anti-immigrant hate rhetoric at the federal level just makes

it worse”

○ CMPD and Courts cannot control ICE activity so cannot make promises about whether ICE will be somewhere or protect people from ICE

26

● U-visa: only about 10,000 are granted a year in the entire US. If the case is denied, the applicant risks deportation. Also, it takes many years (4-12) to process. Someone can get deported even if they have a pending U-visa application (if approved, they can come back).

○ “Then you have people telling these victims ‘Oh you’re only doing this for a U-VISA’ not knowing it doesn’t work like that”

● For U-visa eligibility, there has to be specified criminal charges levelled against the aggressor, so if one of the specified criminal charges aren't pursued or if the magistrate or officers steer people misleadingly to the DVPO instead they won't be able to apply for U-visa. U-Visas require that the applicant aid a state entity in the investigation or prosecution of a specified crime. One of the specified crimes is domestic violence.

● When a criminal case is carried out the DA has to certify the U-visa as opposed to the police officer, which lengthens the process. Ideally this is to help ensure cooperation and willingness of victim to come to court so aggressor can be charged, but realistically it delays the process and gives more time for ICE to come in and seize DV aggressors or victims. Then it is up to the DA over whether to certify the U visa, which they typically don't if someone is seized by ICE.

○ “Yes, you have to do your job and deport people, but our expectation is for you to

still follow the letter of the law.”

● In counties which implement 287(g), ICE knows when the criminal proceedings happen. Although 287(g) was terminated in Mecklenburg County, ICE will likely ramp up their efforts, especially for heightened courthouse activity by ICE

○ “Lack of courage among a lot of local policymakers”

○ “Maybe they don’t agree with what is happening, but they would rather sit and

stay silent than actually take a stand and do anything”

● Again, difficulties arise in pursuing legal processes if there is a lack of transportation, free time, or child care available to the victim.

● Victims may fear that they could possibly lose their children if they or the abuser are deported.

○ “Some of these people are undocumented and their abusers know that so they're like ‘you know what I’m gonna call ICE and you’re never going to see your kids again’”

○ “So they are weighing all of these factors on top of the fact that this might be the primary breadwinner”

● A lack of knowledge about the legal system in the US may prevent victims from reporting DV.

○ “Sometimes they don’t know that no contact means no contact.” ○ “I think the downfall sometimes happens when they go to court (...) because in

their country it might not be a crime.” ○ “You are being arrested in front of a judge for something that you are

accustomed to.” ○ “It becomes difficult because it seems like to them that we are saying that

everything you have been taught is wrong.” Community resources challenges:

● Within the faith community spiritual leaders are not properly trained in counseling on dynamics of IPV. Specifically, characteristics of power and control. Thus, victims of IPV are often at a significantly higher risk of experiencing additional violence by a spouse. For instance, rather than advocating for the victim’s safety, the pastor will encourage the victim to stay in the relationship and to pray for their spouse. Furthermore, the national

27

trend is that most churches are not trained to handle DV cases, often putting the victim and the perpetrator in the same room without victim's direct request to do so.– which violates basic DV training.

○ Victim may be “handed a bible” ○ “They are more likely to go to church, and to go to immigrant-run service

providers”

○ “They often put the perpetrator and the victim in the same room which is like

basics you don’t do that”

○ “Generally speaking, the national trend is that they’re not prepared”

○ “When you add the religious lens that you have to stay together, that can

heighten the issue”

● Victim’s religion, combined with influences from the church community, may become a dilemma to women when deciding whether to move forward with court proceedings.

○ “They are more likely to go to church, than to go to immigrant-run service

providers (LAC)”

● In general, DV victims may not want the perpetrator to get punished due to: ○ Financial reasons (they are the sole or main provider) ○ Shared parenting ○ Not wanting to be alone ○ Loving the person

● Such fears are often heightened for undocumented families due to deportation fears. ○ “Why would I invite this [ICE] into my front door?” ○ “We have super hostile immigration court” ○ “I’d rather live here and maybe get killed, than for sure get deported back home


● For undocumented communities, the fear of ICE is so great that if an individual were to play a hand in the deportation of their abusive spouse it can lead to feelings of betrayal within the community.

● Latino families are typically close-knit and that family dynamics can add a lot of pressure on the victim to not leave their partner or press charges.

● Many immigrants are socially isolated within their ethnic communities, leading them to feel isolated from the rest of the world and can cause them to stay in their abusive relationship.

○ “I never called the police because I wanted him arrested. I called the police

because I wanted him to stop.”

○ “When you are an immigrant in this country, you are disposable”

○ “You show how much you care by showing where you put your time and your

money, and the city is showing they don’t care”

○ “You don’t speak the language you don’t call 911”

● Lack of knowledge about the services available and how to access and navigate them ○ “I don't know if they understand the gist” (Immigrants) ○ “I can read it but that does not mean they know what it means”

Recommendations

First, we wish to highlight several promising upcoming local efforts to better serve DV victims.

Second, we share some ways to prevent DV in immigrant households. Third, based on the

findings presented in this report, we offer various suggestions for education, practice, policy and

research to facilitate the processes of reporting and taking legal action on DV for immigrants. As

28

with the challenges listed, some of the recommendations will benefit all DV victims, whereas

other suggested are tailored more specifically to undocumented victims.

Upcoming local efforts that are anticipated to be beneficial for (immigrant) DV survivors

● E-filing at Safe Alliance-The process of submitting a DVPO will become easier with e-

filing, because the victim will not have to go to different locations to seek emergency

protection from their perpetrator. E-filing reduces transportation barriers for victims living

in the Lake Norman area and also the number of people lost between VACP/LRP and

the courthouse. In addition, it reduces the risk of the victim running into the perpetrator

while seeking an ex-parte DVPO (temporary 10-day PO) (that said, they will still have to

face the perpetrator at the courthouse to gain a DVPO for up to one year).

● Family Justice Center-This promising initiative of co-locating many services for DV

victims including some services from agencies including Safe Alliance, Community

Support Services, CMPD, DA office, and others provides a wrap-around, holistic

approach to addressing DV and serving survivors. There has been a campaign launched

with the hopes that an FJC model will be open and running within the next several years.

This approach has worked very well in other communities (started in San Diego and now

has 32 affiliates nationally, with 3 in North Carolina), especially for immigrants, because

it reduces transportation and referral barriers.

● Early conversations have started to form a Latino or immigrant sub-committee of the

Mecklenburg County DV Advisory Council. The Domestic Violence Advocacy Council

(DVAC) is composed of representatives from various local and statewide agencies and

advocates to solve problems, increase public awareness and support educational efforts

for victims of domestic violence.

● CMPD will be hosting a strangulation training at the Latin American Coalition.

Preventing DV in immigrant households

● Reducing stigma around mental health and offering access to mental health services.

Violence often emerges from stress and generations of violence. Breaking those cycles.

● Promoting culturally appropriate ways to shift the way we think about the relationship

between men and women, and intimate partners.

● Talking more openly about this topic as a community to reduce the stigma. It is important

to get more men involved in bringing solutions to the table to show that not only women

are affected by and care about this issue.

○ “How many people have to die before its deemed important enough?”

● We recognize that we mostly talk about women as victims - because the majority are

female - but that does not mean men cannot be victims as well. In addition, these

conversations need to be inclusive of LGBTQ individuals and same-sex couples. In fact,

recent studies have shown that trans women of color are most at risk for victimization

but are often ignored in conversations about domestic violence.

● For prevention and education, create cross-organizational networks between DV

services, local (immigrant) media, grassroots and faith-based organizations, etc.

● Prevention of domestic violence is not possible without also addressing the systems of

oppression that exist in our society. Both racism and xenophobia in our society greatly

29

impact this population and their existence makes domestic violence more likely to occur

in our society as a whole.

● Addressing risk and protective factors for perpetration of violence through systematic

prevention programming is one step necessary to end overall violence for all

populations. Community organizing/coordination of resources and community

connection are protective factors that relates to many of our recommendations here.

Facilitating DV reporting and legal action in the areas of education, policy, practice and research

● Education:

○ Outreach to immigrant communities to make people aware of the DV services in

the county and how to navigate these services. This includes distinguishing who

does what.

■ CMPD, Sheriff, ICE all lumped together. “The community does not hear

DV CMPD Unit, they hear ‘police’”

○ Victims speaking up (men and women) so that others can see you can get out of

DV situation and that they are not alone.

○ Educating (undocumented) immigrants on their rights, including what to do if ICE

shows up at their home, workplace or courtroom. Clarifying the different ways

that people can come into contact with ICE through the criminal justice system

and the way in which ICE does or does not collaborate with local law

enforcement.

● Policy:

○ Advocate to make climate more friendly towards immigrants so they don't fear

engaging with authorities, reporting crimes, etc.

■ This can be small actions (e.g. sharing the purpose of police presence) to

larger actions (e.g. revamping how agencies look and staff make

up/language access)

○ Not requiring victims to show US ID (accepting foreign ID if identification is

needed) or asking for social security number.

○ More transitional and affordable housing so victims can get out of unsafe homes.

○ Preventing ICE from entering Family Justice Center and other places

○ Develop policies and procedures ensuring proper jurisdictional authority between

agencies (i.e., responding to ICE presence).

● Practice:

○ Regular trainings for professionals (in DV agencies, law enforcement, legal

services, etc.) who deal with DV victims on the immigrant experiences, different

immigration statuses, mixed-status families, and how to best serve immigrants.

■ You’re serving undocumented Latina clients and you have no idea what’s

going on in terms of how ICE operates and how they can enter a facility”

■ “Problem with the mainstream organizations is that only lately have they

been pushing to not only serve one group of people”

○ Regular trainings for immigrant-serving organizations and community (including

faith) leaders on how to best advise and refer someone who reveals they are

dealing with DV.

30

○ Ensuring agencies have staff who are culturally competent and speak multiple

languages.

○ Using the language line if needed, rather than relying on victim’s abuser or

children to interpret.

○ Spanish volunteers in the courtroom to help immigrants accurately fill paperwork,

communicate with authority, and feel more comfortable to share their story.

○ More beds available in shelters, since the shelter has only 120 beds and is full

every day of the year.

○ Organizing donation items to women shelters, like menstrual products, diapers,

etc.

○ Additional funding for services, e.g. Safe Alliance (Breakfast of Hope October 15

fundraiser)

○ Novant needs a program like Atrium (DVHP).

○ Enhancing cross-agency collaborations, e.g. DV services and immigrant/refugee-

serving organizations.

● Research:

○ More accurate and consistent data collection across agencies and over time.

■ Often, data is limited and difficult to obtain, which can make it difficult to

assess problems and possible solutions.

■ We have many different bits and pieces of data from various government

and non-governmental agencies but no comprehensive source.

■ Data not tracked accurately or in the same way or over longer periods of

time which limits our ability to see trends over time and make accurate

assessments of certain patterns.

■ This includes referral data because currently there is no data on how

many victims agreed to get services and their experience of services after

they have been informed or referred.

○ Collecting stories of immigrants who have experienced DV themselves. There

appears to be a disconnect between what agencies and policies say and how it is

experienced by immigrant community members themselves - at least, with the

anecdotal evidence we have available. In order to further examine this, we would

have to conduct interviews with immigrant DV survivors.

○ Dig deeper into the role of grassroots community organizations in dealing with

DV. Since a lot of immigrants do not pursue official reporting and legal action,

talk to more churches, immigrant-serving organizations and clinics where

immigrants may disclose DV.

What’s next?

We hope our report can spur conversations and actions based on the suggestions we outlined.

We are willing to present our findings in English and Spanish to various local audiences,

including DV professionals, immigrant community members, and people working with

immigrants. We also plan on sharing our findings with national academic audiences and state-

wide advocates for immigrants and DV prevention. We are open to additional ideas on how we

31

can improve and share this information. We hope stakeholders will take charge in implementing

some of our recommendations and that we can identify funders to continue this research.

References

Advocate Survey Final (2019). Immigrant Survivors Fear Reporting Violence.

https://www.tahirih.org/news/survey-of-advocates-reveals-immigrant-survivors-fear-reporting-

violence/

Bui, Hoan N., & Morash, M. (1999). Domestic Violence in the Vietnamese Immigrant

Community: An Exploratory Study. Violence against Women 5 (7): 769-95.

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/10778019922181473

Center for Disease Control, (2018). Preventing Intimate Partner Violence.

https://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/IPV-FactSheet.pdf

De La Canal, N. (2018). New Meck Sheriff’s First Act Ends Participation in 287(g).

https://www.wfae.org/post/new-meck-sheriffs-first-act-ends-participation-287g#stream/0

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) (2019).

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/U-and-T-Visa-Law-Enforcement-

Resource%20Guide_1.4.16.pdf

Erez, E. (n.d.). Immigration, Culture Conflict and Domestic Violence/Woman Battering. Crime

Prevention and Community Safety, 10.

https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.cpcs.8140043

Erez, E., Adelman, M., & Gregory, C. (2009). Intersections of Immigration and Domestic

Violence: Voices of Battered Immigrant Women. Feminist Criminology, 4(1), 32–56.

https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085108325413

Fuchsel, C. L. M., Murphy, S. B., & Dufresne, R. (2012). Domestic Violence, Culture, and

Relationship Dynamics Among Immigrant Mexican Women. Affilia, 27(3), 263–274.

https://doi.org/10.1177/0886109912452403

Irvine, A., M. Martinez, C. Farmer, A. Canfield (2019) The Chilling Effect of ICE Courthouse

Arrests.

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58ba8c479f7456dff8fb4e29/t/5dae6ba65642ea5d1cef970

5/1571711914510/ice.report.final.21oct2019.pdf

King, Kendall A., and Gemma Punti. (2012). "On the margins: Undocumented students’ narrated

experiences of (il) legality." Linguistics and Education 23, no. 3, 235-249.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.linged.2012.05.002

https://www.tahirih.org/news/survey-of-advocates-reveals-immigrant-survivors-fear-reporting-violence/


https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/10778019922181473

https://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/IPV-FactSheet.pdf

https://www.wfae.org/post/new-meck-sheriffs-first-act-ends-participation-287g#stream/0

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/U-and-T-Visa-Law-Enforcement-Resource%20Guide_1.4.16.pdf

https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/U-and-T-Visa-Law-Enforcement-Resource%20Guide_1.4.16.pdf

https://doi.org/10.1177/1557085108325413

https://doi.org/10.1177/0886109912452403

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58ba8c479f7456dff8fb4e29/t/5dae6ba65642ea5d1cef9705/1571711914510/ice.report.final.21oct2019.pdf

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/58ba8c479f7456dff8fb4e29/t/5dae6ba65642ea5d1cef9705/1571711914510/ice.report.final.21oct2019.pdf

32

Medina, J. (2017). Too Scared to Report Sexual Abuse. The Fear: Deportation. The New York

Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/30/us/immigrants-deportation-sexual-abuse.html

Menjívar, C., & Salcido, O. (2002). Immigrant Women and Domestic Violence: Common

Experiences in Different Countries. Gender & Society, 16(6), 898–920.

https://doi.org/10.1177/089124302237894

Migration Policy Institute (2016) Unauthorized Immigrant Population Profiles:

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/us-immigration-policy-program-data-

hub/unauthorized-immigrant-population-profiles. Profile of the Unauthorized Population:

Mecklenburg County, NC: https://www.migrationpolicy.org/data/unauthorized-immigrant-

population/county/37119.

Murshid, N. S., & Bowen, E. A. (2018). A Trauma-Informed Analysis of the Violence Against

Women Act’s Provisions for Undocumented Immigrant Women. Violence Against Women,

24(13), 1540–1556. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801217741991

National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV) Fact sheet:

https://www.speakcdn.com/assets/2497/domestic_violence2.pdf

National Crime Victims’ Rights Week Resource Guide: Crime and Victimization Fact Sheets

(2018): https://ovc.ncjrs.gov/ncvrw2018/info_flyers/fact_sheets/2018NCVRW_IPV_508_QC.pdf

National Immigration Project of the National Lawyers Guild (2018, November 27) Deportation of

Domestic Violence Survivor Halted After ICE Arrest at Courthouse. Available at:

https://www.nationalimmigrationproject.org/pr/2018_26Nov_charlotte-courthouse.html.

National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS). The National Intimate Partner

and Sexual Violence Survey, 2010-2012 State Report:

https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/NISVS-StateReportBook.pdf

Pickett, Xavier. (2007). Policing Black Communities.

https://cpjustice.org/uploads/Policing_Black_Communities.pdf

Raj, A., & Silverman, J. (2002). Violence Against Immigrant Women: The Roles of Culture,

Context, and Legal Immigrant Status on Intimate Partner Violence. Violence Against Women,

8(3), 367–398. https://doi.org/10.1177/10778010222183107

Reina, A. S., & Lohman, B. J. (2015). Barriers Preventing Latina Immigrants from Seeking

Advocacy Services for Domestic Violence Victims: A Qualitative Analysis. Journal of Family

Violence, 30(4), 479–488. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-015-9696-8

Schindler, J. (2018). What We Know About 287g in Mecklenburg County – Part I by Barbara

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/04/30/us/immigrants-deportation-sexual-abuse.html

https://doi.org/10.1177/089124302237894

https://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/us-immigration-policy-program-data-hub/unauthorized-immigrant-population-profiles




https://www.migrationpolicy.org/data/unauthorized-immigrant-population/county/37119



https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801217741991





https://ovc.ncjrs.gov/ncvrw2018/info_flyers/fact_sheets/2018NCVRW_IPV_508_QC.pdf



https://www.nationalimmigrationproject.org/pr/2018_26Nov_charlotte-courthouse.html





https://cpjustice.org/uploads/Policing_Black_Communities.pdf

https://doi.org/10.1177/10778010222183107

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-015-9696-8

33

Randolph.https://www.stangreensponcenter.org/2018/03/06/know-287g-mecklenburg-county-

part-barbara-randolph/

Tahirih Justice Center (2019). Survey of Advocates Reveals Immigrant Survivors Fear

Reporting Violence. https://www.tahirih.org/news/survey-of-advocates-reveals-immigrant-

survivors-fear-reporting-violence/ PDF version of the report summary:

https://www.tahirih.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/2019-Advocate-Survey-Final.pdf

Tjaden, P. (2000). Full Report of the Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of Violence

Against Women: Findings from the National Violence against Women Survey. Washington, D.C.

(810 Seventh St., N.W., Washington 20531), U.S. Dept. of Justice, Office of Justice Programs,

National Institute of Justice. https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/183781.pdf

U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 American Community Survey Estimates and 2013-2017 American

Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. Available at: https://factfinder.census.gov.

U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. (2019). https://www.ice.gov/287g

Vidales, G. T. (2010). Arrested justice: The multifaceted plight of immigrant Latinas who faced

domestic violence. Journal of Family Violence, 25(6), 533-544.

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10896-010-9309-5

https://www.stangreensponcenter.org/2018/03/06/know-287g-mecklenburg-county-part-barbara-randolph/

https://www.stangreensponcenter.org/2018/03/06/know-287g-mecklenburg-county-part-barbara-randolph/



https://www.tahirih.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/2019-Advocate-Survey-Final.pdf

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/183781.pdf

https://factfinder.census.gov/

https://www.ice.gov/287g

https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1007/s10896-010-9309-5

immigrants and domestic violence in charlotte …€¦ · are places where immigrants may feel safe...

Documents