Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

When Employers Act, Survivors Thrive: The Call to American Businesses

Opinion

When Employers Act, Survivors Thrive: The Call to American Businesses
woman with hands tied
Photo by engin akyurt on Unsplash

The latest comment from Mr. Trump, minimizing domestic violence to “a little fight with the Wife,” completely dismisses that America is suffering from a public health crisis. According to the Council on Criminal Justice, “domestic violence was the only offense that rose by 3% during the first half of 2025” compared to the same months in 2024, amongst other violent offenses such as homicide and aggravated assault. Domestic violence is not a personal matter; it is a community issue.

America continues to see an increase in domestic violence because we do not focus on protective factors such as economic security.


Financial abuse is experienced by 99% of domestic violence victims, often making these victims financially dependent on their abusers, making it all the more difficult to flee. The prevalence of financial abuse is rooted in coercive control. It is a pattern of domination and entrapment that goes beyond physical harm. It strips victims of their autonomy and creates dependency. These abuses have long-term consequences that often lead to housing insecurity or homelessness.

In my state, California, the legislature made some progress when they passed SB 975 (effective July 1st) to allow survivors to contest coerced debt in court and hold abusers accountable.

Employers can economically empower victims before it is too late.

Many workplaces' federal laws indirectly apply to victims of domestic violence, such as FMLA or OSHA, for time off or safety concerns. Some states, such as California, New York, or Illinois, have more extensive and specific protections for victims.

Beyond these legal protections imposed on employers, what’s in it for them?

Nowadays, people are seeking a workplace whose values align with their own. Companies’ cultures are changing and leaning towards becoming a more supportive environment because they understand that it boosts productivity.

As a domestic violence advocate, my previous employers asked me to assist another coworker who was fleeing. Needless to say, the immense support from the agency and other team members made this person feel safer and supported. Mutual respect and reciprocity start to be the norm.

During the January 2025 wildfire that took Los Angeles by surprise, we saw how the “unsung heroes”-mainly community members - came together to support those in need.

If that is not enough to appeal to people’s hearts, here is a more logical benefit for employers.

The Society for Human Resource Management reported in 2017 that the cost to hire and train a replacement for an employee earning $60,000 is between $30,000 and $45,000. When an employee is supported during a time of crisis, they are more likely to remain loyal and dedicated to their employer. A culture of trust will improve morale and increase employee retention.

As domestic violence expert Dr. Kader Gumus explains, “These supportive environments help survivors manage their trauma and stress, contributing to their overall well-being and ability to function effectively at work.”

In the long term, this symbiotic partnership can result in a mutually beneficial situation. It widens the safety net when people are in crisis, and it enables a more robust workforce.

Employers have the power to change lives. They are not bystanders; they are key players on the front line of prevention. When they choose to stand with survivors, they help rewrite futures, not just for individuals, but for families and communities. It’s time we recognize that the fight to end domestic violence doesn’t stop at the shelter door or the courthouse steps. It extends to every boardroom, breakroom, and workplace across the country. When employers act, survivors thrive.

Stephanie Whack is a survivor of domestic violence, an advocate at the intersection of victimization and homelessness, and a member of The OpEd Project Public Voices Fellowship on Domestic Violence and Economic Security. In 2024, she was awarded the LA City Dr. Marjorie Braude Award for innovative collaboration in serving victims of domestic violence.


Read More

Two groups of glass figures. One red, one blue.

Congressional paralysis is no longer accidental. Polarization has reshaped incentives, hollowed out Congress, and shifted power to the executive.

Getty Images, Andrii Yalanskyi

How Congress Lost Its Capacity to Act and How to Get It Back

In late 2025, Congress fumbled the Affordable Care Act, failing to move a modest stabilization bill through its own procedures and leaving insurers and families facing renewed uncertainty. As the Congressional Budget Office has warned in multiple analyses over the past decade, policy uncertainty increases premiums and reduces insurer participation (see, for example: https://www.cbo.gov/publication/61734). I examined this episode in an earlier Fulcrum article, “Governing by Breakdown: The Cost of Congressional Paralysis,” as a case study in congressional paralysis and leadership failure. The deeper problem, however, runs beyond any single deadline or decision and into the incentives and procedures that now structure congressional authority. Polarization has become so embedded in America’s governing institutions themselves that it shapes how power is exercised and why even routine governance now breaks down.

From Episode to System

The ACA episode wasn’t an anomaly but a symptom. Recent scholarship suggests it reflects a broader structural shift in how Congress operates. In a 2025 academic article available on the Social Science Research Network (SSRN), political scientist Dmitrii Lebedev reaches a stark conclusion about the current Congress, noting that the 118th Congress enacted fewer major laws than any in the modern era despite facing multiple time-sensitive policy deadlines (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5346916). Drawing on legislative data, he finds that dysfunction is no longer best understood as partisan gridlock alone. Instead, Congress increasingly exhibits a breakdown of institutional capacity within the governing majority itself. Leadership avoidance, procedural delay, and the erosion of governing norms have become routine features of legislative life rather than temporary responses to crisis.

Keep ReadingShow less
Trump’s ‘America First’ is now just imperialism

Donald Trump Jr.' s plane landed in Nuuk, Greenland, where he made a short private visit, weeks after his father, U.S. President-elect Donald Trump, suggested Washington annex the autonomous Danish territory.

(Ritzau Scanpix/AFP via Getty Images)

Trump’s ‘America First’ is now just imperialism

In early 2025, before Donald Trump was even sworn into office, he sent a plane with his name in giant letters on it to Nuuk, Greenland, where his son, Don Jr., and other MAGA allies preened for cameras and stomped around the mineral-rich Danish territory that Trump had been casually threatening to invade or somehow acquire like stereotypical American tourists — like they owned it already.

“Don Jr. and my Reps landing in Greenland,” Trump wrote. “The reception has been great. They and the Free World need safety, security, strength, and PEACE! This is a deal that must happen. MAGA. MAKE GREENLAND GREAT AGAIN!”

Keep ReadingShow less
The Common Cause North Carolina, Not Trump, Triggered the Mid-Decade Redistricting Battle

Political Midterm Election Redistricting

Getty images

The Common Cause North Carolina, Not Trump, Triggered the Mid-Decade Redistricting Battle

“Gerrymander” was one of seven runners-up for Merriam-Webster’s 2025 word of the year, which was “slop,” although “gerrymandering” is often used. Both words are closely related and frequently used interchangeably, with the main difference being their function as nouns versus verbs or processes. Throughout 2025, as Republicans and Democrats used redistricting to boost their electoral advantages, “gerrymander” and “gerrymandering” surged in popularity as search terms, highlighting their ongoing relevance in current politics and public awareness. However, as an old Capitol Hill dog, I realized that 2025 made me less inclined to explain the definitions of these words to anyone who asked for more detail.

“Did the Democrats or Republicans Start the Gerrymandering Fight?” is the obvious question many people are asking: Who started it?

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. and Puerto Rico flags
Puerto Rico: America's oldest democratic crisis
TexPhoto/Getty Image

Puerto Rico’s New Transparency Law Attacks a Right Forged in Struggle

At a time when public debate in the United States is consumed by questions of secrecy, accountability and the selective release of government records, Puerto Rico has quietly taken a dangerous step in the opposite direction.

In December 2025, Gov. Jenniffer González signed Senate Bill 63 into law, introducing sweeping amendments to Puerto Rico’s transparency statute, known as the Transparency and Expedited Procedure for Access to Public Information Act. Framed as administrative reform, the new law (Act 156 of 2025) instead restricts access to public information and weakens one of the archipelago’s most important accountability and democratic tools.

Keep ReadingShow less