Tran makes a comparison between domestic violence restraining orders and ordinary tort cases. It is very rare for a tort case to restrain anyone from otherwise lawful activity. If it were similarly rare in domestic cases, then no one would be complaining.
She objects to the column saying that "name-calling" falls under the definition of domestic violence. But then you refer me to NCADV, which does indeed define domestic violence to include "name calling" on this page.
Her own web site defines domestic violence to include "insults".
Tran keeps referring to the situation in Bucks County, PA, as if it contradicts the above column. I am not familiar with Bucks County. Perhaps it has have more enlightened laws and judges, but I doubt it.
She says that PFA (Protection From Abuse) defendants are not subject to criminal penalties because they are merely kicked out of their homes and subjected to court orders about what they can do and where they can go. They will also be arrested if they are accused of violating those orders. Those sound like serious punishments to me.
Tran's own web site has instructions for how a woman can have her boyfriend sent to jail for six months for violating a PFA.
She suggests the domestic violence only affects custody disputes when harm to the children is proved. Again, I don't know about Bucks County, but Calif. Family Code 3044 says that DV determines custody even when the children are not involved in any way.
I notice that Tran will help women get a PFA, but you won't help undo the damage that you have done. Her site says:
If you wish to withdraw your Order completely, you will need the services of a private attorney and you must appear in Court before the Judge.Tran's letter is a good reason for VAWA being de-funded. These feminist organizations take tax money, and spend it on political lobbying, anti-male tactics, and legal abuses.