A psychology professor has criticized The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) in that it may ultimately be used against men in Illinois and elsewhere in their role as father and husband. He feels that the presumption too often in domestic violence matters is that the man is to blame.

Though such a presumption may be correct in certain situations, there are other circumstances where the man turns out to be falsely accused. This professor asserts that close to 40 percent of individuals physically harmed in cases of domestic violence happen to be men. Statistics also bear out that the rate of women charged domestic violence has gone up dramatically during the past decade.

It is alleged that judges routinely will sign restraining orders against husbands without any evidentiary cause. Yet though such orders are frequently needed to protect battered women, one can also appreciate how damaging such an order can be to the family.

Critics feel that VAWA will exasperate this situation by creating incentives for judges to sign even more restraining orders. VAWA, they claim, places the father or husband in a circumstance where their attorney will have limited ability to cross examine witnesses, and this will thus hamper an attorneys' efforts to discover what actually occurred.

The professor may be overstating his case. It is not an attorney's job to create the law. It is their job to defend their clients and abide by the court rules that have already been set down. Such counsel nevertheless will press the courts to allow in only relevant evidence and will defend their clients as best they can.

It is the duty of attorneys and courts to make certain that only the truth of each spouse's actions are brought in as evidence at trial. Neither state nor federal legislation should ever be interpreted in such a way as to deprive any citizen of their right to be defended.

Source: Men's News Daily, "The Violence Against Women Act and The War on Men," by Gordon E. Finley, Ph.D., April 23, 2012