An Analysis Of The Intimate Partner Rate

[Bugman803]

The proponents of IMBRA have never supplied any reliable information regarding the abuse rates of marriages facilitated by International matchmaking organizations. The Tahirih Justice has supplied numerous examples of anecdotal evidence claiming high abuse rates of IMB faciliated relationships.
They recently wrote an article on their website, “Campaign to Stop Exploitation by International Marriage Brokers”. They stated “While no official National statistics exist on the incidence of abuse in such marriages (facilitated by matchmaking organizations) experts agree “it is higher in this population than for the nation as a whole”.
These so-called expertsare obviously confused by citing outrageously confusing and exaggerated abuse rates and quoting the following abuse rates: “77%” “42.1%“… “no definitive way of knowing”, “50% of all legal immigrant Service providers have been seeing women abuse by men they met through a marriage broker”……. and so on and so forth...
The proponents of IMBRA have attempted to deceive the public, and politicians with a series of confusing and misrepresented statistics. The only reliable measure of “domestic violence” is the Intimate partner murder rate. Tahirih Justice Center has failed miserably in their attempt to determine accurate “domestic abuse rates”. The problem is that “Domestic Abuse” is reported under a myriad of different charges making statistical tracking of “domestic violence” extremely difficult. In addition domestic violence often goes unreported whereas murder is always reported and statistically denoted as one crime-“murder”.
Over a span of twelve years there were exactly three foreign women killed out of 100,000 women that immigrated in marriage agency arrangements. (Anastasia King, Susanna Blackwell, and Alla Barney.)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail-order_bride (Scrool down to “United States”.) The intimate partner rate for foreign immigrants (IMO faciliated relationships) is 3 per 100,000 in 12 years or .25 killed per year per 100,000.

FBI and NOW statistics reveal that 1400 American women residents were killed by their intimate partner each year. … So… over a 12 year period 16,800 American women residents were killed by their intimate partner. The death ratio for American women residents is much higher … The intimate partner murder rate for all American women residents is 18 per 100,000 in 12 years or 1.5 killed per year per 100,000

In order to make the calculation for American women residents I took the 16,800 figure and divided that by 85,000,000 which represented the approximate number of American women residents living with or married.
The statistical comparsions reveal that women who immigrate to the United States through an International Marriage Broker are in fact dramatically less likely to be involved in domestic violence as calculated by the Intimate Partner Murder Rate.
Proponents of IMBRA sensationalize the tragic deaths of 3 immigrant women rallying public support to punish the  (percieved) ugly American matchmaking client and carefully ignoring and masking the much more serious problem …the 16,800 American women residents killed.
 
There are many reasons why clients of matchmaking are less prone to violence. The typical marriage agency client would be an individual in his 40’s well established into his career, earns above average salary, better educated. The factors mentioned above would tend to diminish the argument that Maria Cantwell made (July 13, 2004) regarding her suggestion of an “epidemic” of abuse. Senator Cantwell's pattern of deception includes emotional propoganda claiming high abuse rates of "international marriage brokers"  and in the next sentence she cited a "42.1% abuse rate".  Cantwell deceptively tried to manipulate using  statistics of Hispanic women living in the most dangerous areas of Washington DC.  The study cited is a severe misrepresentation of facts- a form of lying considering  none met their husband through a dating agency. The women in the study were mostly (likely) illegal,  poor and not well educated whereas IMB clients are generally well educated,  earn above average salaries.
The Dept. of Justice recently stated that, “In general the lower the annual income the higher rate of intimate partner violence”.
Why should these “International Marriages” be held to a higher standard of government scrutiny. The only problem with IMO facilitated marriages is a false perception by the sponsors of IMBRA who used emotional propaganda (and not honest reliable factual and statistics) to force their radical beliefs on a democratic society. Looking at the larger picture they (the USCIS) are simply making it harder and harder for law abiding American citizens to marry someone who lives outside the boundaries of the United States. The International Romance Regulation Act (IMBRA) sets the stage for more intrusive government intervention into the personal decisions of our most sacred personal love lives and sanctity of marriage.
Welcome to Tahirih 's brave new world!
  Dave Root

[johnreeds]

There are many reasons why clients of matchmaking are less prone to violence. The typical marriage agency client would be an individual in his 40’s well established into his career, earns above average salary, better educated.

Good work Dave!

The information about the demographic profile of men seeking overseas brides is well established. The fact that it is also totally contrary to established criminal demographic profiles shoudl be obvious, but it is not. Thanks for pointing this out Dave.

The proponents of IMBRA have only emotion, bias, and myth to support their arguments. Nothing else.

[Bugman803]

John.
I think its very important to examine the demographic , social and economic make up of the average
matchmaking client.  One could argue that there is no absolute "average"  matchmaking client. However one characteristic of crucial importance is the fact that they (IMB clients) do indeed earn above average incomes.   Suppoprters of IMBRA have consistently used emotional propoganda to suggest that these relationships (IMB faciliated)have the potential for violence where the male client (financially well off)
is seen almost purchasing a bride (this anecdotal suggestion was stated in the 1999 INS report also).

The Tahirih Justice has a Frequently ASked Questions Section addressing marriage broker information on their website:http://tahirih.org/legal/docs/Top10IMBRAFAQs(Final).pdf

The first paragraph states "IMB's do business give male clients a sense of entitlement and encourage their perception that they are purchasing a bride".  Scrool down to question  #7.. and TJC  states  "IMB's firmly establish a "male as a client" female as a commodity" dynamic which include "Satisfaction guaranteed" assurances offered to male clients at so -called "romance tours". At one point they cite an IMB who claims that for $10,000 fee is a bargain to "get the woman of your dreams".

IMBRA sponsors/ supporters have used this propoganda to suggest that there's a power imbalance which is a form of modern day slavery where men can buy women and abuse them in these relationships. But this is not slavery; its simply two people who want to get together for a better life and to have a beautiful family together- that's not slavery nor is it a power imbalance. If these anecdotal suggestions are true then all married women in the world would be victims of this power imbalance which IMB supporters suggest is a form of  trafficking/ slavery.

IMBRA suporters' suggestion that IMB's clients are financially well off (Is correct) but it take a huge leap of faith to suggest that individuals who are financially well off and earn above average  IMB clients  are seen as purchasing these (vulnerable) women to buy them and  take advantage of them, abuse them, etc.

The Dept. of Justice released a report entitled, "Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report, Intimate Partner Violence".  It clearly demonstrates that  the amount of household income  dramatically affects the rate of
intimate partner violence  ... dramatically !


If you scroll to the bottom and read appendix table 6 it shows a table of Intimate partner violence by household income.  The table clearly shows that those households with less than $7500 reported a intimate partner violence rate of 20.3 females per 1,000. (This explains why Senator Maria Cantwell cited low income abuse rates of poor hispanic women in the Washington DC area  and none of these women met their husband through an IMB).

House hold incomes of $75,000 or more has only 3.3 females afected by Intimate partner violence.

Lets examine the facts. Those households earning more than $75,000 income are 6 times less likely to be involved with domestic abuse than those earning $7500 or less. The lower the income the higher the rate of domestic abuse and since clients of International matchmaking organizations earn above average income they obviously have lower rates of abuse.
This is exactly opposite of what Senator Maria Cantwell stated in her July 13, 2004 testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee claiming a growing epidemic of abuse with IMB clients.

[NewTaylor]

The simple fact of the matter is that the Tahirih Justice Center and Legal Momentum are not experts on the “mail order bride” industry.  I remember when the Tahirih Justice Center’s Jeanne Smoot challenged Dave Roots’ editorial that IMBRA was a violation of men’s civil rights in the Cumberland Times.  She claimed (indirectly)* that “mail order brides” suffer three times the rate of abuse that American women do in relationships.  That is absolute nonsense.  Her data was based upon a study that had absolutely nothing to do with “mail order brides.”  It is incredible that these people get away with these types of unsubstantiated claims.

She also claimed that on the exempted sites (those not covered by IMBRA), men and women are both paying members and are treated equally**.  That is also total nonsense.  The exempted sites have thousands of foreign women on them who aren’t paying any membership fees.  Eastern European and Third World women join these sites for free in the hope of marrying a man in the First World.  It is the men in the First World that are paying the membership fees.  There isn’t anyone in the media that even questions these claims.

What type of satisfaction guaranty is there?  I haven’t seen any.  For the average man, a 20% response rate would be a good response rate.  Most of the women will not even respond to most of the men that write to them.  They try so hard to make it look like the women are commodities being purchased by men.  It is just a bunch of overly emotional nonsense.  The only thing that is being purchased is contact information.  That is all that is being purchased.  The foreign women aren’t being purchased.

* “Study results indicate immigrant victims suffer more severe abuse, more often, and that abuse rates in marriages between U.S. citizens and foreign women are approximately three times higher than in the general U.S. population. IMBRA simply tries to protect a particularly vulnerable group of foreign women from an avoidable tragic end.”[1]


**  “But the lines IMBRA draws between different types of agencies are distinctions with a principled difference. Speaking about “mail-order bride” agencies in which Western men pay for access to women typically from developing countries, the 1999 INS report voiced the concern that “These are relationships fostered by for-profit enterprises, where the balance of power between the two individuals is skewed to empower the male client who may be seen as ‘purchasing’ a bride….” That troubling dynamic simply doesn’t exist in other online dating services in which both men and women, from whatever country, are charged and treated the same.” [2]

Reference:

[1] & [2]  Jeanne L. Smoot, “Marriage Broker Law Seeks to Protect Readily Exploited
                Women,” Cumberland Times News, July 11, 2006.