Hope for Victims: Support the Partner Violence Reduction Act
  • Petitioned U.S. Senate

This petition was delivered to:

U.S. Senate
U.S. House of Representatives
Sen. Chuck Grassley
Sen. Patrick Leahy

Hope for Victims: Support the Partner Violence Reduction Act

    1. Petition by



The Partner Violence Reduction Act brings hope to victims…victims of abuse who have been turned away from over-crowded shelters, victims of false allegations, and victims of harmful policies such as mandatory arrest.


In addition, the Partner Violence Reduction Act bans discriminatory practices, encourages partner reconciliation when feasible, requires the accreditation of educational programs, strengthens the scientific basis, improves accountability, curbs immigration fraud, and reinvigorates the constitutional protections of domestic violence programs.


The Partner Violence Reduction Act strengthens and amends the federal Violence Against Women Act. A new day is dawning… Contact your elected officials in Washington DC and tell them to support the Partner Violence Reduction Act.


For more information, visit: www.saveservices.org/pvra


Recent signatures


    1. Reached 500 signatures
    2. The Senate Judiciary Committee Needs Your Calls By This Thursday, Jan. 26!

      The Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to vote on the reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) this coming Thursday at 10am. As you know, we have found many flaws in this bill, which is why we created the Partner Violence Reduction Act (PVRA). Today we’d like you to call members on the committee listed below. Tell them to reject VAWA and to support the Partner Violence Reduction Act. And don’t forget to ask your facebook, twitter and google+ friends to call too.

      Chuck Grassley (202) 224-3744
      Orrin G. Hatch (202) 224-5251
      Jon Kyl (202) 224-4521
      Jeff Sessions (202) 224-4124
      Lindsey Graham (202) 224-5972
      John Cornyn (202) 224-2934
      Michael S. Lee (202) 224-5444
      Tom Coburn (202) 224-5754

    3. Reached 250 signatures


    Reasons for signing

    • Steve Semienick LYNCHBURG, VA
      • over 1 year ago

      Domestic violence needs to be addressed in a gender neutral manner consistent with constitutionally guaranteed due process.

    • Kevin Ashe LA, CA
      • almost 2 years ago

      wife lied and easily got restraining order. I will work to make sure these unfair laws change.

    • Jacob Mattson PACIFIC, WA
      • almost 2 years ago

      The DV legal process currently in place is in desperate need of reform. These broken policies are extremely destructive, expensive and unconstitutional. Today's policies are a mockery of what the U.S. legal system was based upon and meant to represent.

      • almost 2 years ago

      I think the Partner Violence Reduction Act is a good thing and fully deserves support!

      Especially as it does not discriminate between sexes and recognizes women are just as capable of domestic violence as men.

    • Hannah Wallen :-) MY CITY, OH
      • almost 2 years ago

      It started out small, and we foolishly expected it to be over quickly. The first time the police came to the house, those of us who knew the family figured out that this was a tactic the false accuser was employing to try to regain custody of their child, lost to the falsely accused because the accuser's current husband had viciously abused the child. Since the accuser was lying, we all figured that the evidence would be all that was necessary to clear the accused's name and let the family move on with their lives.

      We were wrong.

      After her first false allegation was shot down, she leveled another... and another... and another... it just kept going and going. From beginning to end, the ordeal lasted just shy of 6 years.

      As the case progressed, a pattern quickly emerged. The accuser's M.O. was to go to the courthouse first, instead of the police. There, she would profess fear of her ex-husband and obtain a Temporary Restraining (Civil Protection, in our state) Order. A hearing would be set for a date 30 days down the road. During that 30 days, she would at some point accuse her ex of violating the order. The accusations ranged from acts as brutal and heinous as forcible rape (for which she was allowed to change her story multiple times, and fail to provide any evidence besides her own ever-changing story) to a drive-by greeting, a story that was full of holes, but which still had to be addressed and taken seriously under the law. For the latter half of the ordeal, the guy's friends (including myself) rallied an effort to keep watch on him so that no matter where he went or what he did, there would be a credible witness. We knew that if she ever caught him alone, that would be it - in court, her word was worth more than his even though she was a proven liar. The guy spent a couple of years with literally no privacy outside of restroom use.

      Following the allegation, the false accuser would then motion for the restraining order hearing to be postponed, often giving flimsy reasons or no reason at all. She wanted the alleged violation heard first because, in Ohio, even if the TRO was overturned, if she got him convicted of violating it before that, the conviction would stick... while if the TRO hearing went first and the TRO was overturned, the charge for violating it, if nonviolent, (like the alleged drive-by-greeting) would be dropped. Because she knew she did not have a legitimate case for the TRO, she pushed for the allegations, knowing that if she caught him without a provable alibi she'd get a conviction regardless of guilt or innocence. The accused responded by requesting the alleged violation case be continued until after the TRO hearing. In one instance, the two played continuance tag for a year - meaning that the false accuser had a temporary restraining order in place for a year. According to the attorney for the accused, this tactic is one she has seen consistently and frequently employed by women in divorce/custody cases, with the active assistance and encouragement of the local D/V advocacy system. It's actually standard for them.

      I have since written about this type of malicious prosecution, as well as some different permutations I've seen committed against other men among my family and friends and in a few cases I've learned of from connections made while seeking advice and assistance with my friend's case.

      At the same time as the malicious prosecution was being employed, the false accuser also stalked and harassed her alleged abuser and his family, leaving her empty cigarette packs at his family's home to show she'd been there, throwing poisoned toys and food over the fence for the family's pets. She stalked his extended family, including his sister, whose tires she has repeatedly nailed, and his underage niece, whose dog she assaulted with a knife. She even stalked his witnesses, vandalizing my workplace with paint in an attempt to implicate him.

      Local police wouldn't do anything about the stalking because the woman was backed by the local D/V advocate system. A judge did award the niece and sister restraining orders against the false accuser, but when the accuser violated those orders, local police refused to enforce them because of the domestic case, and no charges were brought against the false accuser for her crimes.

      The case got downright ridiculous, evolving into textbook malicious prosecution. A vexatious litigation complaint was filed against the false accuser. That complaint got "lost" in the system for 2 years before the victim's lawyer pushed it forward by threatening to sue for violation of his right to a speedy trial. On the good end of it, during those two years, the accuser provided her victim with a lot more evidence for the vexatious litigator case. On the bad end, she almost killed him with the stress, elevating serious symptoms of physical ailments that he had under control prior to her harassment of him, and later complicating his battle with a cancer that developed during the last year of the ordeal. (He is in remission now.) It took a monumental effort, but the false accuser is now on Ohio's list of vexatious litigants, and she is barred from taking any further legal action against her ex without a judge's prior approval.

      The victim still suffers nightmares, is jumpy about things related to the aspects of the case, feels compelled to document his whereabouts, avoids answering the phone... he has some other PTSD symptoms that I won't share, but which can be directly traced back to conditions under which he was held for questioning (after being "not arrested" by the police) or to the experience of being subjected to surprise visits by officers. He's really not a conventional therapy kind of person - he's dealing with it in his own way and showing improvement, but his recovery is going to be a slow, hard road, and his wife is having a rough time with it.

      Because the false accuser was backed by local D/V victim's advocates, no charges were ever brought against her for her false allegations, for the perjury she committed in court, for her stalking of the victim, his family, and witnesses, for her violations of judge's orders in the case. She was even permitted to get away with violating a child support order for years, amassing some $8000.00 in debt from which she was partially released by a judge because of her refusal to work, (an unheard of ruling, had she been a man) all because she had the courtroom support and assistance of case workers from that D/V victim's advocacy organization.


    Develop your own tools to win.

    Use the Change.org API to develop your own organizing tools. Find out how to get started.