Cultural awareness about the prevalence and indiscrimination of domestic violence has grown dynamically in recent decades. France’s Gisèle Pelicot’s case reminds us that domestic violence sometimes manifests in unusual forms and hides in plain sight. The legal arena’s appreciation for the gravity of the issue and the importance of treating such cases with a nuanced and comprehensive approach is likewise improving. 

In addition to exercising jurisdiction over divorce, dissolution, parental rights and responsibilities, and support matters, Hamilton County Domestic Relations Court (DR Court) has jurisdiction to decide certain domestic violence matters. Last year, 42% of our cases constituted Petitions for Domestic Violence (or Dating Violence) Civil Protection Orders, which primarily involve violence between family or household members or individuals in dating relationships. The violence takes various forms, including physical harm, threatening physical harm, and child abuse. Domestic violence also manifests in ways that have historically been often dismissed, such as causing mental distress through stalking and harassment, coercive control, and endangering a child’s health or welfare by exposure to violence in the home.

The process of filing for protection is intended to provide immediate, usually same-day, relief. A person seeking protection, called a “Petitioner,” files a “Petition for Domestic Violence (or Dating Violence) Civil Protection Order” for themselves and/or on behalf of other family or household members, against their alleged abuser, called the “Respondent.” Within 24 hours, the Petitioner’s case is heard in an ex parte hearing. At this point, the Respondent has not been served — the petition has just been filed hours or minutes ago — and the only evidence before the Court is that which is provided by the Petitioner. If the Court determines during the hearing that the Petitioner and the other household members are in “immediate and present danger,” an ex parte temporary order of protection is granted. Whether the Court grants an ex parte order or not, they set a “full” (i.e. final) hearing in approximately 7-10 days. Law enforcement then begins trying to locate and serve Respondent. At the full hearing, both parties appear and present their evidence, and the Court determines whether to grant a final protection order for a period of up to five years.

The legal definition of domestic violence is found in O.R.C. 3113.31. Unfortunately, our litigants usually do not have the benefit of legal counsel and have likely never laid eyes on the Ohio Revised Code. They may have no idea what to expect when they walk through our doors. For victims whose abuser tracks or controls every movement, just physically making it to the courthouse to file a petition may be a feat. If the victim has been living in the cycle of abuse for some time, they could have low self-esteem and may be confused about the chronology, frequency, and/or specificity of events. They may even suffer from undiagnosed brain injuries due to repeated beatings, complicating their ability to recall events. The New York Times reported domestic violence victims’ brain injuries are often as or more severe as those of football players and soldiers and can cause chronic traumatic encephalopathy. The injuries are also more common. “Every year, hundreds of concussions occur in the N.F.L.; thousands occur in the military. [The] estimated number of annual brain injuries among survivors of domestic abuse: 1.6 million.” ¹

The effects of such traumatic history can make the filing process feel prohibitively challenging and demoralizing. Add to that the stress of the actual hearing where the Petitioner must take an oath, sit before a stranger in a robe, and share their most intimate and possibly embarrassing moments “on the record.” It is no wonder many of them, on average 77% yearly and as much as 80%², do not follow through in appearing for their full hearings even when they could be granted a final, long-term protection order. The very place they must go to reach safety may feel unsafe. 

We at Hamilton County DR Court realized we needed to remove impediments that discourage Petitioners from filing or following through with their filings. Of course, our Court is only one player in a host of agencies that come into contact with domestic violence victims. Hamilton County Sheriff Charmaine McGuffey, whose deputies routinely serve our Court’s protection orders, simultaneously recognized a need for improvement and better communication between agencies. She is acutely aware that serving protection orders is one of the most dangerous operations our law enforcement officers carry out in their line of duty and that we need to make it as safe as possible. 

Sheriff McGuffey and DR Court’s Administrative Judge Anne Flottman shared their mirroring disquietudes and ultimately created the Hamilton County Domestic Violence Task Force (DV Task Force), extending an open invitation to every city and county agency that touches victims and survivors of domestic violence.  Dozens have shown up to have a seat at the work table, including representatives from Hamilton County Court of Common Pleas, Hamilton County Municipal Court, Hamilton County Clerk of Courts, Hamilton County Prosecutor’s Office, City of Cincinnati Prosecutor’s Office, Hamilton County Probation Department, Women Helping Women, Hamilton  County Commission on Girls and Women, TriHealth CARES, YWCA Greater Cincinnati, Legal Aid Society of Greater Cincinnati, Ohio  Crime Victim Justice Center, UC College of Law — DV Clinic, and more. 

The DV Task Force’s goals are simple: do better for domestic violence victims and make the process safer for everyone, including victims, alleged abusers, law enforcement officers serving the orders, and the public. The only requirements to participate are a willingness to ask tough questions, take accountability, and collaborate. The DV Task Force meets on a biweekly basis where we talk openly about mistakes that have been made and how to prevent their recurrence. We highlight the practices that are working and share our success stories. Everyone is eager to understand more about each other’s role and what we can learn from each other. The result is something special — a multi-disciplinary group of professionals of varying (and irrelevant, for our purposes) political views who share a common goal and are actually doing something about it. When he took office, Clerk of Courts Pavan Parikh initiated ways to streamline the domestic violence petition process in the General Division of Common Pleas (for non-family and non-household member cases), and is now extending his expertise to DR Court.

As we at DR Court became more educated through our participation in the DV Task Force, we identified fundamental changes within our structure that needed to be made and got to work. First, rather than randomly assigning domestic violence cases to our general docket courts, we created a dedicated team of trauma-informed specialists to hear these cases. The court now has four magistrates — Karen Falter, Jeremy Richards, Craig Webb, and Amie Wright —who hear about 90% of the domestic violence cases. They have been trained in the complex and often insidious dynamics of domestic violence and meet biweekly to discuss best practices, unique or novel questions of law or procedure, and recent case law, and to generally support each other in this difficult work. The undersigned is the liaison between the DR Court’s DV Team and the DV Task Force. 

The Court found an office in our building for Women Helping Women so a WHW advocate is on site to support Petitioners before, during, and after their hearings. To avoid Petitioners feeling intimidated, the Court now physically separates Petitioners and Respondents at opposite ends of the waiting area while they wait for their cases to be called. We work daily with the Sheriff’s deputies who monitor activities in our building to ensure everyone feels secure while they wait. 

To allow Petitioners more time to share their experiences and explain their need for protection, we allotted more docket time for domestic violence hearings. Also, we offer more flexibility to them when setting their hearing times. We have improved access to interpreters, the online filing process, and our explanation to the litigants of what to expect from the court process. 

Our DV Team also works to accept and more seriously consider evidence regarding coercive control and emotional abuse. Consider the Petitioner who has never been hit but who lives in fear because her partner repeatedly threatens to kill the children if she leaves the relationship. She is a hostage in her own home experiencing psychological domestic violence. Electronic tracking — through the use of air tags or smart phones on shared phone plans — is another common form of coercive control that may constitute domestic violence and warrant a protection order.

Children are the most vulnerable and helpless of victims in domestic violence cases. Frequently, they are direct victims of a parent’s or stepparent’s physical or sexual abuse. Other times, they suffer psychological harm from exposure to violence between adults in the home. The child who watched her stepfather punch and strangle her mother was deemed a victim and provided protection, even though the stepfather had never laid a hand on the child. Our DV Team is committed to recognizing the trauma and life-long consequences children suffer solely from witnessing domestic violence in their homes.

These improvements help us to better understand and protect those in our community experiencing domestic violence, ensure due process for the accused, make comprehensive and thoughtful decisions, and collaborate with law enforcement to make service of our civil protection orders safe and efficient for all. We track our progress partially by paying attention to the rate of case dismissals, which are usually the result of a Petitioner failing to appear at the final hearing. After removing reasons a Petitioner may not appear — being eyed by their abuser in the waiting area, feeling alone because no advocate was present to support them, being discouraged by the language barrier when no in-person interpreter was available that day — we have seen a marked decline in dismissals, from 80% in 2023 to 69% in 2024, the lowest in 20 years. We want it lower, but are excited about this progress. 

We are always learning and working to strengthen ourselves. Part of that growth is recognizing what is working and what isn’t. We are proud to share our accomplishments and successes, and promise to continue conscientiously finding opportunities for growth. Last October, Commissioners Denise Driehaus, Stephanie Summerow Dumas, and Alicia Reece marked October “Domestic Violence Awareness Month” in Hamilton County. We hope you’ll join us in wearing your purple this October in an effort to recognize and prevent domestic violence. 

Victims often have no idea they are victims, steps away from becoming survivors. This is just the life they live every day. If we talk openly about domestic violence of all shapes, and work to dispel normalization of it and shame surrounding it, we can motivate victims to believe in themselves and take action. And when they take action, we at DR Court will be here, listening. 

Tiffany Evans is a Magistrate and Mediator in Hamilton County Domestic Relations Court. Prior to joining the Court in 2023, she practiced exclusively Domestic Relations Law for a decade at Keating Muething & Klekamp PLL, where she also served as a Parenting Coordinator and a Guardian ad Litem representing children in several counties and courts.