By Ann Kaiser

The Virginia Crime Commission might be able to learn a lesson from the ongoing fight in North Carolina over whether to include same sex couples in its protective order laws.

That’s because a special commission last month started to explore whether to include couples in dating relationships in the state’s protective order laws–a road North Carolina went down in 1997.

But when North Carolina lawmakers adopted the change, they made sure that the only dating relationships covered were couples of the opposite sex.

And in recent years, domestic violence groups have pushed lawmakers in the Tar Heel State to include all couples under the dating clause in its protective order law.

That has led some to suggest Virginia will likely struggle to define what a “dating relationship” is in the review of its protective order laws.

Special legislative bodies in both states are exploring these issues and are expected to pass on suggestions to their respective governing bodies. The protective order work group is operating in Virginia, and North Carolina coordinates the joint legislative committee on domestic violence.

Virginia House Minority Leader Ward Armstrong (D-Martinsville) said similar measures to extend protective orders to non married couples have been rejected during his 20 years in the legislature. But even thought it has been rejected, it is still an issue that still should be revisited, he said.

At the same time, Armstrong, a member of the protective order work group, acknowledged that the problem is still going to be the same: defining dating relationships.

“There are so many relationships between persons of a romantic nature that don’t fit the typical husband-wife category, but in my opinion that doesn’t make it any less necessary to have a protective order in place,” he said.

As Virginia considers including dating relationships in their family abuse law, groups in North Carolina are pushing to eliminate the clause that exclusively defines dating relationships as “persons of the opposite sex.”

Elizabeth Froehling, co-executive Director at the North Carolina Coalition Against Domestic Violence, a statewide membership organization providing support services to local domestic violence agencies and allied professionals, said that this has been on the group’s agenda since 2002.

“It’s important to protect all victims regardless of what anyone thinks about a specific relationship,” said Froehling.

Both states join only eight others who make exclusions regarding provisions on dating relationships in protective orders.

In Virginia, the commission has yet to determine how family abuse laws will be changed, but if rights are extended, there may be several ways of adopting legislation.

Stewart Petoe, director of legal affairs for the Virginia State Crime Commission, said, “if there’s a definition [of a dating relationship] there’s nothing for the Supreme court to interpret, but if [the legislature] leave(s) it open to interpretation, it would be up to the Supreme court to determine whether the law would protect a homosexual or heterosexual couple.”

Like in North Carolina,  those not covered under Virginia’s family abuse law can seek protection through alternative measures. Criminal law grants rights to victims of sexual abuse, stalking, or harassment, but oftentimes after the offense has been committed.

“We don’t want people to have to suffer severe bodily injury before they can get a protective order,” said Claire Gastanaga, general counsel for Equality Virginia, a statewide organization representing gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender individuals.

It is also more complicated to appeal for protection in stalking and other protective measures that must go through civil court.

“The problem is that it is very difficult legally to get an injunction against another person. You have to do it in higher court and it is not a simple process, and it’s difficult for a layperson,” said Armstrong.

Armstrong said that if protective orders become easier to get, Virginia legislators may be concerned with overloading the system.

“I think that one of the impediments is fear of overloading the system when you begin to expand the law,” he said. “Are there going to be a flow of protective orders in the court and are they going to be able to assimilate and handle it if it happens?”

The crime commission’s push follows the death of University of Virginia lacrosse player Yeardley Love. Love was found dead in her apartment May 3 after an encounter with her ex-boyfriend and member of the Virginia men’s lacrosse team, George Huguely.

Her death and the media mayhem that followed have sparked renewed interest in re-evaluating gaps in Virginia’s protective order laws.

The commission’s protective order work group is scheduled to meet through the summer, discussing other issues including providing GPS devices for people with protective orders as well as updating the protected orders issued on the crime databases in police officers’ squad cars.