Bringing employers to Missouri has long been a priority for many. This also means a dual focus on the employees, and Proposition A was a mandate from almost 58 percent of voters that employees want more. On behalf of survivors of domestic and sexual violence, we are in opposition to HCS #2, which includes HB567, 546,758, and 958.
People get sick. No one likes coming to work and sitting in a workspace next to a sick person, knowing they are likely contagious and will end up sick themselves and will come to pass illnesses to their home and family. The sick person isn’t coming to work to be malicious – more often than not, they come because they can’t afford not to come to work when their employer does not have a sick leave policy in place.
The sick leave provision in Proposition A is an exceptional piece of legislation in the way it also allows victims to participate in the justice system without fear of loss of income or employment. In other states, this is referred to as ‘sick and safe leave.’
According to the Missouri Economic Research and Information Center (MERIC) of the Missouri Department of Economic Development, in 2022, women comprised just over half of Missouri’s workforce, and that number “has remained steady over the last decade.” [i] Women of all ages are more likely to work part-time jobs compared to men, according to the same report. Removing sick leave will have a direct impact on women working to support families.
At the same time, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that one in four women and one in seven men will experience physical violence by their intimate partner at some point in their lifetime. Additionally, one in three women and one in six men will experience some form of sexual assault in their lifetime. Victims and survivors of violence are those we work with and employ.[ii]
There is an expectation in this state that crime victims, including domestic and sexual violence victims, will participate in the criminal legal process. While there may be some exceptions, it is inconsistently applied and/or understood. Throughout the legal system, a “cooperating witness” is one who we expect to attend court hearings and court-related preparatory meetings. Under existing law (595.209.14), which many employers are likely unaware, we afford survivors protection from losing a job if they are subpoenaed or are otherwise participating in a court case. Through the Victims Economic Security Act (VESSA), domestic and sexual violence victims are protected from losing a job to seek assistance. For both, we still expect them to leave work without pay, a luxury many cannot afford.
Study after study has shown that domestic violence results in poor health outcomes.[v] The physical aftermath of an assault may include blows to the head resulting in head trauma, strangulation, rape, or other types of injuries a victim may be suffering when they come to work. This means employees come to work experiencing dizziness, stomach pain, bleeding, and other symptoms that they may be forced to ignore for the sake of keeping their job rather than tending to their injuries. Employers clearly want productive employees. Without paid sick leave the choice is no pay or requiring someone to come to work rather than caring for their bruised, concussed, and bleeding bodies or that of their children. This only addresses the physical harm. There is still emotional and mental harm that can be mitigated with counseling and intervention, if workers are afforded paid time off and the surety that they won’t lose their job by caring for themselves and their families.
Economic security is a key factor in preventing intimate partner violence. Violence prevention is enhanced when efforts to strengthen the economic security of individuals in violent relationships is stabilized. Their ability to secure housing, feed themselves and their children, and access childcare increases their ability to seek safety and receive support as they determine their next steps. “Providing paid safe [sick] leave ensures survivors can not only remain in their jobs but also maintain financial autonomy and security to leave their abusive partners and keep their families safe.”[iv]
Victims need to seek life-saving services such as medical appointments and court appearances during regular office hours. They are required to choose between their income, which is their lifeline to safety and security, or seeking a systems response that they may not have had experience with, or may have not been helpful to them before.
Economic coercion is a tactic used by abusive partners. Survivors may hear, “turn in your receipts and the change from your trip to the grocery store;” “give me your paycheck;” or “I will be in charge of all our financial assets.” While survivors are experiencing this type of economic coercion, we are asking them to risk a lesser paycheck or potential job loss for an absence to seek a protection order – thus signaling to their abusive partner that they have missed work by bringing home a smaller check or no paycheck at all. This signal can lead to another violent incident and increased surveillance, stalking, and controlling actions.
We understand that asking employers of all sizes to change their practices to expand and include sick leave may be a challenge. Our own membership includes employers of all sizes. Staffing can be an issue, and we acknowledge that. We’ve heard the argument that recordkeeping is an issue. As nonprofits we understand and experience our own burdens with recordkeeping, so we know that implementing a new system or spreadsheet, while inconvenient, isn’t impossible.
Tossing out the sick leave law isn’t the answer when the result for victims of violence, or for folks who just get sick, risk of losing their job and falling into medical debt, or facing ongoing violence, and for both – poverty.
In closing, the new statute affords seven days a year of sick leave for employers with more than 15 employees or five days a year for those with less than 15. The state doesn’t require family leave, vacation, or holiday for private employers. Five or seven days a year. The statute does allow for carry-over balances, but the law itself doesn’t mandate the use of the carryover hours. It only mandates those five or seven days. It is by the employer’s own policy that they would allow an employee to use more.
We want employers to come to Missouri. We want a robust, healthy, and safe workforce. We want businesses to thrive. We also want victims of domestic and sexual violence to be able to seek safety for themselves and their children. Five, or seven days, 40 or 56 hours a year, isn’t too much to ask. If concerned about how and when someone can take sick leave, and whom they can care for beyond themselves, then modify the law – don’t strip these crucial provisions that can help so many.
[i] https://meric.mo.gov/sites/g/files/zuston356/files/media/pdf/2024/03/Women_in_the_Workforce_2024_Final.pdf
[ii] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK499891/#:~:text=Each%20year%2C%20approximately%20500%2C000%20women,out%20of%20every%2010%20men.
[iv] https://policy.futureswithoutviolence.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Futures.NPWF-Fact-Sheet-5.12.23.pdf
[v] https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1524838020985541?casa_token=YSiiYuQAaYoAAAAA%3A4Mk-k8leAPSIr6F-f0OHyOy8XAPceJl5CDykrQRooAJxMxnNFpPAddmFGKRJlTf6xJVSSzRlD0VuvA
As 2025 begins, MOCADSV is excited to announce that we have begun production of Season 4 of our interview and discussion-style podcast, MOmentum for Change: Voices of the Missouri Movement. Our podcast features advocates and thought leaders from across Missouri who are united under our shared goal of ending rape and abuse in Missouri.
Last season, we debuted changes to MOCADSV’s podcast, including a new title and graphics. The name change celebrates our shared efforts for social change throughout the Missouri Movement, and aligns with our public policy motto, “We change laws. We change lives.” In addition to the new name, Season 3 debuted a new cover page and graphics that incorporate the colors teal and purple in recognition of domestic and sexual violence awareness.
The podcast is produced by MOCADSV staff from monthly discussions recorded by host Nora Mosby. Production for Episode 1 of Season 4 has begun; the new episode will be released later this month. The new season and all prior seasons of MOmentum for Change are available on Spotify, Apple, or Google Podcasts today. MOmentum for Change is also available on the MOCADSV YouTube Channel, where you can also stream episodes from previous seasons. Subscribe to receive new episodes monthly.
The Missouri Coalition Against Domestic and Sexual Violence (MOCADSV) urges House and Senate leaders to prioritize the passage of the Crime Victims Fund Stabilization Act H.R 8061 (CVFS Act) to prevent further cuts to the Crime Victims Fund (CVF). The CVFS Act will redirect excess, unobligated funds from the False Claims Act (FCA) into the Crimes Victims Fund (CVF) to prevent catastrophic cuts to domestic and sexual violence service providers across the country. This legislation responds to a Fiscal Year 2024 40 percent cut to VOCA funding, forcing service providers to reduce or eliminate services, lay off staff, and, in some cases, close their doors.
Urge Congressional Leaders to Pass the Crime Victims Fund Stabilization Act This Year!
National and state organizations are working hard to get the Crime Victims Fund Stabilization Act (CFVS Act) in an end-of-year bill, but we need your help. More than 200 cosponsors in the House have supported H.R. 8061, and a growing number of bipartisan Senate cosponsors have supported S.4515.
Call, text, email, and make social media posts to your members of Congress and ask them to cosponsor and call upon leadership to bring for a vote and pass the CVFS Act.
You could use the drafted message below to ask for their support:
I am calling on behalf of [your organization and on behalf of xxx survivors] to ask [Representative ____ or Senator ____] to urge congressional leaders to include the Crime Victims Fund Stabilization Act in the Continuing Resolution (CR) or any end-of-year package. Congress must finish work on this before the end of the year. Victims in Missouri can’t wait.
If you call the offices of Representatives Cleaver or Wagner, thank them for their work. Representative Wagner coauthored the bill and Representative Cleaver was an early cosponsor.
You can find your Senator at https://www.senate.gov/senators/contact and your Representative at https://ziplook.house.gov/htbin/findrep_house?ZIP=.
To contact your Senators and Representatives by phone, call the US Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 or find their phone numbers on their websites.
To contact your Senators and Representatives by email, go to their website and click on the ‘contact us’ link. If you know someone in your Senators’ and/or Representative’s office, contact them directly.
Background
The Crime Victims Fund provides Victims of Crime Act (VOCA) grants to state, territorial, and local agencies that provide lifesaving services to more than six million victims of all types of crime annually. This funding supports almost 6,500 direct service providers, including domestic violence shelters and rape crisis centers. In recent years, deposits to the CVF have reduced significantly. Further reductions in VOCA funding could mean catastrophic cuts in services available to survivors of domestic and sexual violence, and their children. The prolonged decrease in funding of the CVF has led to a devastating $600 million cut in funding compared to last year. Further decreases in funding could result in limited availability of services as providers are forced to triage their services or close.
Representatives Ann Wagner (R-MO), Debbie Dingell (D-MI), Stephanie Bice (R-OK), Jim Costa (D-CA), and Nathaniel Moran (R-TX), and Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL), and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) introduced the Fund Stabilization Act (H.R. 8061/S.4514). The bill would temporarily redirect excess, unobligated funds from the False Claims Act to the CVF while ensuring payments to whistleblowers and defrauded government agencies will not be affected. MOCADSV partnered with Representative Wagner and her Congressional staff, as well as the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence and National Network to End Domestic Violence to raise national awareness of the need to stabilize the Crime Victims Fund.
To read the National Network to End Domestic Violence’s (NNEDV) CVFS Act press release, click here.
US v Rahimi
On June 21, 2024, the Supreme Court decision in US v Rahimi upheld a federal gun control law that makes it a crime for people with an Order of Protection against them by a spouse or partner to possess a firearm. This decision provides affirmation and security to domestic and sexual violence survivors in Missouri and across the country.
In the opinion drafted by Justice Roberts, he writes, “We conclude only this: An individual found by a court to pose a credible threat to the physical safety of another may be temporarily disarmed consistent with the Second Amendment.”
When perpetrators of violent crimes have access to firearms, they are more likely to kill their partners than perpetrators who do not. According to Everytown Reporting, domestic violence perpetrators with firearms are five times more likely to kill their female victims. The decision in the case of US v Rahimi helps promote the safety of victims of domestic and sexual violence by removing the perpetrator’s right to possess a firearm.
The Supreme Court decision does not directly change Missouri’s law, which does not require that a person convicted of a domestic violence offense surrender firearms following the conviction or a protective order. The decision in the case of US v Rahimi provides protections for survivors accessing Orders of Protection in other states.
City of Grants Pass, Oregon v Johnson
The Supreme Court’s decision in City of Grants Pass, Oregon v Johnson on June 28, 2024, upholds ordinances in Grants Pass Oregon that prohibit people who are experiencing homelessness from using blankets, pillows, or cardboard boxes for protection from the elements while sleeping within city limits. The 6-3 decision found that criminalizing homelessness did not violate the US Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment. The decision in the case of City of Grants Pass, Oregon v Johnson allows state and local governments to punish people for experiencing homelessness.
Many people experiencing homelessness have also experienced domestic or sexual violence within their lifetime. More than 90% of homeless women experience severe physical or sexual abuse at some point in their lives, and 63% have been victims of domestic or sexual violence. Limited housing options for people experiencing domestic violence and/or homelessness
In 2022, Missouri passed a similar law, making it illegal for people experiencing homelessness to sleep or camp on state-owned property. The law was ultimately considered unconstitutional by the Missouri Supreme Court. The decision in the case of City of Grants Pass, Oregon v Johnson provides Missouri the opportunity to resubmit a similar law.
Browne, A. 1998. “Responding to the Needs of Low Income and Homeless Women Who are Survivors of Family Violence.” Journal of American Medical Women’s Association. 53(2): 57-64
Moyle v. United States & Idaho v. United States
The Supreme Court dismissed the case of Moyle v. United States & Idaho v. United States, in which Idaho challenged the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act and doctor’s abilities to provide abortions to mothers experiencing life-threatening emergencies. Idaho law completely bans abortion with the only exception being to prevent a pregnant person’s death. The ban does not contain exceptions for preventing grave harm to the person’s health.
The Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA) is a federal law that requires hospitals with emergency departments to provide care to anyone who needs it. The United States sued Idaho under EMTALA which requires Medicare-funded hospitals to provide stabilizing treatments to patients experiencing medical emergencies. Idaho’s strict abortion ban potentially prevented doctors from performing abortion care on patients who need an abortion to prevent serious health harm.
The case was dismissed and sent back to the appeals court. Idaho doctors will be able to perform emergency abortions while the case makes its way through the courts.
Missouri law bans all abortions, with no exception for rape and incest. Abortions are allowed for medical emergencies that threaten the life of the pregnant person or “create a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman.” Under the EMTALA law, Missourians experiencing life-threatening injury or illness can receive an abortion to prevent death, to stabilize the patient’s health, or to prevent grave harm to the patient’s health.
Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. Food & Drug Administration
The Supreme Court upheld the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines for distributing Mifepristone, a commonly used abortion bill, by mail and telemedicine in Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. Food & Drug Administration. In a 9-0 ruling, the justices found that the plaintiffs did not have standing to sue.
The continued access to Mifepristone allows survivors of domestic and sexual violence in states where abortion is legal to access care for unwanted pregnancies.
Survivors of domestic and sexual violence often experience reproductive coercion including denied access to contraceptives and abortion care. Approximately 1 in 5 young women reported experiencing reproductive coercion. As many as one-quarter of women of reproductive age accessing healthcare providers for sexual and reproductive health services reported a history of experiencing reproductive coercion at some point in their lives.
Pregnancy can increase a person’s vulnerability to intimate partner violence, and abusive partners often exercise reproductive coercion over their victims. Survivors of IPV who experience reproductive coercion are less likely to be able to make decisions about family planning and contraception because of the dynamics of power and control present in abusive relationships.
The Supreme Court’s decision in the case of Alliance for Hippocratic Medicine v. Food and Drug Administration allows survivors of domestic and sexual violence access to reproductive care after experiencing reproductive coercion and violence from their partners.
Missouri law bans all abortions, with no exception for rape and incest. Abortions are allowed for medical emergencies that threaten the life of the pregnant person or “create a serious risk of substantial and irreversible physical impairment of a major bodily function of the pregnant woman.” This law prevents Missouri residents from accessing abortion medications by mail.
National Crime Victimization Survey. (2005). https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/criminal-victimization-2005-revised
Tarzia, L. & Hagerty, K. (2021). A conceptual re-evaluation of reproductive coercion: Centering intent, fear, and control. https://reproductive-health-journal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12978-021-01143-6
Rowlands, S. & Walker, S. (2019). Reproductive control by others: Means, perpetrators, and effects. BMJ Sex Reprod Health. (45) 61- 7. https://srh.bmj.com/content/45/1/61
Domestic Violence Awareness Month (DVAM) is over six months away, providing plenty of time to begin planning for awareness campaigns around the state. MOCADSV has created two letter templates to share with your city government to light cities across the state purple on October 19, 2024, for Missouri’s Domestic Violence Awareness Day.
The Coalition created two template letters, one for cities that already change the lighting in their city buildings for different events, and one for cities that currently do not already participate. The letters encourage members of your city government to change the lighting to purple for Missouri’s Domestic Violence Awareness Day by explaining the history of the awareness day and highlighting the importance of spreading community awareness.
Join us in lighting the state purple by sharing these letters with your local city governments. Click here to access the templates.
We grieve with Kansas City today. Yesterday’s events are still being absorbed by so many. The impact of the fear for those on the scene and later for the families and friends who have stood by those who were able to walk away physically unharmed continues to ripple. Dealing with trauma can be immensely challenging but there are resources available. The Crisis Lifeline is available 24/7 by dialing or texting 988. Their services are free and confidential. You can also call your local Mental Health Centers. You don’t have to deal with your trauma and feelings alone.
