1.5Community-Based Efforts That Address Domestic and Sexual Violence

A.Domestic & Sexual Violence Service Agencies

Michigan domestic and sexual violence service agencies provide abused individuals with help and support in getting free from violence. For additional information, including a list of local domestic and violence service agencies, see the Michigan Department of Health & Human Services, Domestic & Sexual Violence.

Domestic and sexual violence service agencies provide many forms of assistance to victims of domestic and sexual violence. For information on services provided county-by-county throughout Michigan, see Michigan.gov, Find Services In Your Area.

The Code of Criminal Procedure provides that “[a] police officer or a prosecuting attorney may provide a domestic or sexual violence service provider agency with the name, demographics, and other pertinent information of, and information to facilitate contact with, a victim of domestic or sexual violence for the purpose of offering supportive services to the victim.” MCL 776.21b(1). “If a police officer or prosecuting attorney provides information to a domestic or sexual violence service provider agency under [MCL 776.21b], that police officer or prosecuting attorney shall notify the victim of domestic or sexual violence that the information was provided.” MCL 776.21b(1). MCL 776.21b “does not authorize the disclosure of a confidential address.” MCL 776.21b(2).

“The providing of information by a police officer or prosecutor under [MCL 776.21b(1)] is in addition to any other requirement under law to provide notice or information to a victim of domestic or sexual violence, including, but not limited to, [MCL 780.753 and MCL 752.953].” MCL 776.21b(3).

B.Batterer Intervention Services (BIS)

Although the Battering Intervention Services (BIS) providers may vary in their approach, the BIS programs are generally designed to hold domestic and sexual violence perpetrators accountable for their actions and to provide the domestic and sexual violence perpetrators with an opportunity to change their behavior. See the Battering Intervention Services Coalition of Michigan (BISC-MI), BISC-MI Mission Statement.

To assist courts in identifying BIS providers that respond to the need for safety and accountability, many states and several Michigan localities promulgated batterer intervention standards.¹ These standards articulate minimum guidelines for the operation of batterer intervention services as they work to provide abusers with an opportunity to change their criminal behavior. See the Batterer Intervention Standards for the State of Michigan.

The purpose of the Batterer Intervention Standards for the State of Michigan is to “[a]ssist in helping judges and others identify Batterer Intervention Services (BIS) that are reliable, predictable[,] and responsive sources of intervention (treatment)[,] [and to] [p]rovide the public and the court with realistic expectations of service.” SCAO Administrative Policy Memorandum 1999-01, p 2.

The Batterer Intervention Standards for the State of Michigan require “[e]ach [BIS] provider [to] develop an agreement with its referring courts regarding reporting procedures (e.g. when the batterer re-offends or fails to comply with program rules and expectations).” Batterer Intervention Standards for the State of Michigan, supra at §8.14. To facilitate communication with the referring court regarding a participant’s progress, it is critical that a BIS provider obtain the participant’s consent to release information to the court and/or probation department.² See Id. at §8.3.

The Batterer Intervention Standards for the State of Michigan also require the BIS providers to “report to probation, the court[,] and/or Child Protective Services any criminal behavior or violation of court order relating to domestic violence that is relayed by the batterer during the court of service.” Id. at §6.2.

C.Ethical Concerns With Judicial Participation in Coordinated Community Response

A judge may participate in a coordinated community response to domestic violence so long as the “activity as a member of an organization [does not] cast doubt on the judge's ability to perform the function of the office in a manner consistent with the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct, the laws of this state, and the Michigan and United States Constitutions.”³ MCJC 2(F). For a list of quasi-judicial activities a judge may engage in, see MCJC 4.

However, “[a] judge should not accept appointment to a governmental committee, commission, or other position that is concerned with issues of fact or policy on matters other than the improvement of the law, the legal system, or the administration of justice.” MCJC 4(I).

Additionally, “[a] judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety.” MCJC 2(A).

See State Bar of Michigan Ethics Opinion, JI-66 (March 23, 1993), regarding a judge’s participation on the board of a civic organization dedicated to helping certain victims, presumably including those of domestic violence. Many other ethics opinions, judicial tenure commission opinions, and opinions from other jurisdictions exist that address ethical concerns related to judicial participation on various committees or organizations. A full discussion of those are beyond the scope of this benchbook.