ILNews

IBA: Changes Announced Impacting Protective Order Registry

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

By Kerry Hyatt Blomquist

Last month was “Domestic Violence Awareness Month.” Yeah, I know—it was also “Breast Cancer Awareness Month,” and while I am certainly not anti-anti breast cancer, I do at times wish the DV Movement had the PR momentum that the Breast Cancer Awareness folks do—the guy that changed my oil last month was in a pink jumpsuit for Lord’s sake.

Anyway… good things—great things—are happening in Indiana in the ongoing fight against Intimate Partner Violence. The Indiana Supreme Court recently announced that a quarter of a million dollar grant received from the US Department of Justice will be funneled into updates and modifications to Indiana’s Protective Order Registry. Starting as soon as early 2011, protective order petitioners could be notified via text or email that their orders have been served or that their orders are about to expire. This is so important because the most dangerous time for any victim of violence is when they do try to finally escape that violence. Knowing exactly when their abuser is notified is critical to their safety planning.

Another change coming down the pike: Protection Order forms will soon be available in Spanish, which of course will make the system more accessible to Spanish speaking survivors. This is an equal access to justice move that is long overdue and impossible to disagree with.

And finally, the Protective Order Registry will be accessible to advocates and other members of the public, which will allow advocates to continue to help survivors get the Orders for Protection designed to keep them safe. Best of all, those advocates can provide other resources and services to survivors at that time, be it safety planning, shelter options or counseling. And those same advocates can explain fully what can and (as importantly) CANNOT be done with a Protective Order, keeping abuse of process cases in check.

The Indiana Supreme Court and JTAC have been amazingly proactive and forward thinking in their commitment to the development of Indiana’s Protective Order Registry. This is great news for those of us on the front lines in the fight against domestic and intimate partner violence in Indiana. Next on the agenda—purple jumpsuits at Jiffy Lube next October. •
____________

Blomquist is Legal Director for the Indiana Coalition Against Domestic Violence and Co-Chair of the Indianapolis Bar Association’s Legislative Committee.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. @ President Snow, like they really read these comments or have the GUTS to show what is the right thing to do. They are just worrying about planning the next retirement party, the others JUST DO NOT CARE about what is right. Its the Good Ol'Boys - they do not care about the rights of the mother or child, they just care about their next vote, which, from what I gather, the mother left the state of Indiana because of the domestic violence that was going on through out the marriage, the father had three restraining orders on him from three different women, but yet, the COA judges sent a strong message, go ahead men put your women in place, do what you have to do, you have our backs... I just wish the REAL truth could be told about this situation... Please pray for this child and mother that God will some how make things right and send a miracle from above.

  2. I hear you.... Us Christians are the minority. The LGBTs groups have more rights than the Christians..... How come when we express our faith openly in public we are prosecuted? This justice system do not want to seem "bias" but yet forgets who have voted them into office.

  3. Perhaps the lady chief justice, or lady appellate court chief judge, or one of the many female federal court judges in Ind could lead this discussion of gender disparity? THINK WITH ME .... any real examples of race or gender bias reported on this ezine? But think about ADA cases ... hmmmm ... could it be that the ISC actually needs to tighten its ADA function instead? Let's ask me or Attorney Straw. And how about religion? Remember it, it used to be right up there with race, and actually more protected than gender. Used to be. Patrick J Buchanan observes: " After World War II, our judicial dictatorship began a purge of public manifestations of the “Christian nation” Harry Truman said we were. In 2009, Barack Obama retorted, “We do not consider ourselves to be a Christian nation.” Secularism had been enthroned as our established religion, with only the most feeble of protests." http://www.wnd.com/2017/02/is-secession-a-solution-to-cultural-war/#q3yVdhxDVMMxiCmy.99 I could link to any of my supreme court filings here, but have done that more than enough. My case is an exclamation mark on what PJB writes. BUT not in ISC, where the progressives obsess on race and gender .... despite a lack of predicate acts in the past decade. Interested in reading more on this subject? Search for "Florida" on this ezine.

  4. Great questions to six jurists. The legislature should open a probe to investigate possible government corruption. Cj rush has shown courage as has justice Steven David. Who stands with them?

  5. The is an unsigned editorial masquerading as a news story. Almost everyone quoted was biased in favor of letting all illegal immigrants remain in the U.S. (Ignoring that Obama deported 3.5 million in 8 years). For some reason Obama enforcing part of the immigration laws was O.K. but Trump enforcing additional parts is terrible. I have listed to press conferences and explanations of the Homeland Security memos and I gather from them that less than 1 million will be targeted for deportation, the "dreamers" will be left alone and illegals arriving in the last two years -- especially those arriving very recently -- will be subject to deportation but after the criminals. This will not substantially affect the GDP negatively, especially as it will take place over a number of years. I personally think this is a rational approach to the illegal immigration problem. It may cause Congress to finally pass new immigration laws rationalizing the whole immigration situation.

ADVERTISEMENT