CEDAW, Domestic Violence, and the Case for U.S. Ratification

Introduction: The U.S. and CEDAW

In the late 1970s, the United Nations convened the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women and thereby "codified comprehensively international legal standards for women." Since the first countries ratified the Convention in 1980, over 185 countries have signed and ratified the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW). The Convention explicitly champions the rights of women worldwide, and ratifying CEDAW obliges participating states to put its principles and provisions into practice. One country agreed to sign but not ratify CEDAW — that country is the United States of America.

The American Bar Association urges United States lawmakers to ratify CEDAW, especially because of its pertinence to domestic violence law. As the American Bar Association (ABA) notes, the Convention would require unified anti-domestic violence laws and protection for women who seek help across state borders. Without CEDAW or a similar national standard for ensuring genuine gender equality, the United States is sorely lacking cohesive means to address the problem of violence against women.

Federal Standards and Cross-State Protection

One major advantage of having a federal standard for domestic abuse is that women fleeing their abusers could trust the equal application of anti-domestic violence law. Currently, women who flee across state lines to extricate themselves from an abusive relationship face uncertain futures. "Victims of domestic violence are often limited in their ability to travel because protection orders issued in one state are not always enforced by other states" (ABA). Those women also lack the assurance that a central support system will aid them in transitioning from a financially dependent partnership to an independent existence. Standards like CEDAW would ensure women access to support for their psychological and financial needs.

Moreover, the ABA notes that "the failure to enforce protection orders is perhaps the weakest link in the legal safeguards available to women." Women who rely on restraining orders to stave off former abusers cannot necessarily trust the efficacy of those orders. Restraining orders are generally localized, which means women cannot trust that their abusers will be apprehended in states other than their place of residence. Women who leave their abusers are taking proactive measures, but without a valid and reliable system of support, no woman is assured that her safety is a nationwide concern. Victims of abuse remain in abusive relationships for a number of reasons, but a lack of viable options is certainly one of them — particularly for women living in poverty.

Battered Women's Syndrome in the Legal System

United States law does expressly condemn violence against women, but inconsistency and a lack of commitment to prosecuting domestic violence continue to frustrate all whose lives are affected. The use of battered women's syndrome — also called the battered women's defense — in murder trials for women who kill their abusers is one of the ways the legal and justice system has offered some support for victims of abuse. Recognizing battered women's syndrome as a legitimate defense is helpful in many cases but does not solve the underlying issues. Battered women's syndrome is a "cluster of behaviors or traits" characterized by learned helplessness: the tendency to become submissive in an abusive relationship.

The syndrome explains a wide range of behaviors that might seem odd or even unacceptable to those who have never experienced or witnessed an abusive relationship. Why women choose to stay with abusive partners can at least in part be explained by learned helplessness, which begins with a genuine belief that the first incident of abuse was a fluke. Forgiving an initial act of violence, the woman may then experience a long period of calm in the relationship. After this "temporary success," however, the abuse recurs — often more severe and more frequent. Furthermore, women in abusive relationships may have children, may be financially dependent on their partner, or may have no friends or family members to whom they can turn for support. With nowhere to go and no means to get there, a woman quite understandably stays with the abuser.

Federal standards like those suggested by CEDAW would help ensure that no woman would have to remain with an abuser. She would instead have access to services that promote independence and safety. Without access to social services, battered women remain too long in their abusive relationships.

Conclusion: Ratifying CEDAW as a National Imperative

The Macy et al. research, coupled with the lack of federal support for a nationwide network of services, points to one of the root causes of domestic violence: gender inequity. Gender equality remains elusive in a society that claims otherwise. Learned helplessness and financial dependence are both linked to traditional gender roles and behavioral norms. Domestic abuse has long been considered a "private" issue — one that rarely surfaces until the problem escalates into ancillary issues including alcohol and drug abuse that force help-seeking (Macy et al.). Because of the stigma surrounding victims of domestic violence and the lack of sufficient social censure of abusive behavior, women who seek counseling for a substance abuse problem are unlikely to simultaneously disclose their domestic violence situation.