On May 30, Travis Decker, a combat veteran, allegedly murdered his three daughters, ages five, eight, and nine, in Washington State. Suffering from severe PTSD and unable to obtain adequate mental health services, Decker, in the words of his ex-wife’s attorney, transformed from a “loving man” into a “monster.” “The courts didn’t fail these girls,” the attorney said, “It was our system. If somebody had provided Travis with the help he needed, those girls would be alive.”
The “system” is in desperate need of an overhaul. Just like the sexual assault epidemic in the U.S. military, acts of domestic violence and child abuse have become all too common among active-duty military personnel and veterans with combat experience. When the tour of duty ends, many bring the war home, injecting familial life with violence that can culminate in suicide and, as the catastrophic accusations against Decker make all too clear, homicide.
Nobody knows more about the problem than Stacy Bannerman. When her husband, who had changed into “a familiar stranger,” to use her words, returned from the Iraq war, he was no longer a loving companion but an abusive drug addict. His behavior grew violent, including an attempted strangulation and threatening Bannerman’s life with an assault rifle. Bannerman left her husband, but she did not quit the fight to protect military families through an expansion of mental health services for veterans and the construction of a more peaceful society.
Bannerman has devoted over a decade to calling attention to the crisis of military service-connected domestic violence—an often thankless task. Despite the headwinds, the author of Homefront 911: How Families of Veterans are Wounded by Wars has testified before Congress and is helping lead the newly formed Yellow Ribbon Casualty Campaign. It is painful for Bannerman to revisit her trauma regularly, but when we recently spoke by phone, she said, “It is the work that my soul has agreed to do.”
This interview has been edited for clarity and brevity.
DM: What is the Yellow Ribbon Casualty Campaign, and why is it necessary?
SB: The Yellow Ribbon Casualty Campaign is a group of survivors—folks who have experienced injury, damage, or loss as a direct result of post-9/11 service-connected domestic violence. The campaign is to get accountability from the United States government, specifically the Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs. These government agencies need to be held accountable. Frankly, the accountability is long overdue. We are doing it because we have to. The government has conducted studies since before Vietnam. So, that’s well over half a century. The government knows very well that combat exposure significantly increases the risk and likelihood of post-combat domestic violence. Also, domestic violence tends to be severe in a post-combat situation. We’re talking about shooting, stabbing, and strangulation. We’re not talking about a push or shove. It’s much more likely to be lethal than civilian domestic violence. The government has known this for decades, and they’ve done nothing about it. We’re trying to expose the truth.
DM: What kinds of numbers are we talking about in this crisis? How many victims?
SB: So, while there have been all kinds of education, funding, and training around veteran suicide, there has been a cultural and legal failure to have anything near a commensurate amount of education, funding, and training around service-connected domestic violence. The government isn’t tracking it. So, what are the exact numbers? We don’t know. The VA has a legal, internal policy of mandatory reporting. They have to comply with the VA directives on this matter. I ran a FOIA request submitted on March 19, 2019, the 16th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq. Years later, the VA asked if I was still interested. I assured them I was. Finally, when they responded, they could not produce a single document demonstrating their compliance with either their internal policy regarding domestic violence or child abuse or compliance with the mandatory reporting laws in the various states. So, the VA is either out of compliance with its policies or not in compliance with FOIA requirements. When I use the phrase “cover-up,” this is Exhibit A.
DM: This is quite similar to the sexual assault epidemic within the military.
SB: Yes.
DM: What is it about the nature of military service that leads to high rates of violence, particularly against women?
SB: Women and children. It is the combat exposure, particularly the PTSD resulting from it. What we are seeing is that if the service member has intermittent explosive disorder, he has a three to five times greater frequency of violence within the home. I was recently in Washington, D.C., to launch the Yellow Ribbon Casualty Campaign with families from across the U.S. We had all sustained injury, damage, or loss as a result of post-9/11 wars and military service. There were mothers, wives, and children. One of the women couldn’t be there because she was at the wake of her husband, who had just committed suicide. People need to understand that there is a close link between suicidal ideation and homicidal ideation, particularly in veterans. There is a reason that psychological screenings always ask, “Are you in danger of causing harm to yourself or others?”
So, why do the “or others” not matter in our governmental institutions? If you want to talk about numbers, think about how if there is a single veteran suicide, on average, there are five or six immediate family members affected. If there is a veteran committing violence at home, we’ve got a spouse, and we’ve got kids. A lot of the murders have happened in front of the children. Then, in turn, those children will be treated and often hospitalized for suicidal ideation. One of those children, who was hospitalized at eight years old, joined us in Washington, D.C.
DM: I will turn the question around even if you asked it rhetorically. You said, “Why don’t the ‘or others’ matter?” Why don’t the political structure and mass media consider this issue important?
SB: First and foremost, it is because the family member is not a military investment. We are not government issue. There’s a reason that the VA counselors create what they call “collateral damage files.” That’s all we are—collateral damage. The government hasn’t invested millions of dollars in us. And it would like to do whatever it can not to invest millions of dollars in the families. What we know for a fact is that Army Strong directly correlates with family strong. Soldier retention is directly correlated with family satisfaction. Force readiness is tied to family readiness. All the family readiness and support groups are volunteers. The VA has veteran caregivers, most of whom do it for free. We are in a patriarchal, sexist society, and there are fewer institutions where that is more reflected than the United States military. Women are valued only as free labor.
The nation, after Vietnam, did understand that, regardless of how bad the foreign policy is, don’t take it out on the soldier. Well, now there’s been a pendulum swing in the other direction. It’s “Thank you for your service,” and the soldier can do no wrong. It’s “every soldier is a hero.” Well, not every soldier is a hero, and the soldiers themselves acknowledge that. But, in civilian America, because of the military-civilian divide, the only way they can assuage the guilt and shame over contributing nothing to the post-9/11 wars, one of which—Iraq—was based on lies, is never to disparage the veteran. It’s such a horrifically uncomfortable conversation. We don’t want to have this conversation.
DM: What does that say about war and the federal government, where the lead discretionary budget item is the military?
SB: Some bells cannot be unrung. The collateral damage of war cannot be contained. We aren’t the first generation of military families going through this, but the Yellow Ribbon Casualty Campaign wants to ensure that we are the last generation to go through this. I don’t want to go to one more funeral of one more spouse, child, or caregiver.
DM: How exactly is the Campaign organizing and fighting back?
SM: It’s a multi-pronged approach. We’re going to look at reintroducing the Kristy Huddleston Act, which I wrote. It is named after a woman who was shot to death by her Iraq War veteran husband. It funds caregivers and makes medical care and mental health services more readily available to military families. We are trying to set up Congressional hearings. We are filing claims for compensation for damage, injury, or death. There is a two-year window in which you can file claims if a government employee is responsible for the damage, injury, or death. The VA has a legal duty to inform about any potential known workplace hazards that could detrimentally impact its employees and their families. We’re also looking into a class action suit for family members who have suffered losses. And we need to fight for the establishment of services for military families because there are none.
We are also trying to expand the Superfund laws. Right now, the Department of Defense can be held liable for a toxic chemical spill. People directly impacted can sue the DOD. Why don’t we have a similar law that allows people who are harmed or suffer property loss as a result of toxic violence to hold the government accountable for cleanup, recovery services, and repair?
A big part of it, though, is public education. People don’t want to talk about it, but when it comes to military service-connected domestic violence, silence is deadly.
DM: How does all of this affect the women in the military?
SB: I suggest asking women veterans. I don’t feel comfortable speaking for them other than saying that most know they are entering a male-dominated institution when they sign up.
I’ll also add that there are many beautiful and positive things about masculinity. I want to be clear about that. But what we are seeing, particularly with this current administration, are the consequences of a dysfunctional masculinity.
DM: And because you’ve lived with those consequences, what do you think of this resurgence of sexism? It was always there, but…
SB: Yes, it’s been weaponized again. It is celebrated again. I’d like to think it is the death rattle, but I don’t know. There was a referendum on consciousness in our country with the last election; frankly, we lost. Something broke with us in the nation. I don’t know how long we will look at what isn’t working and hold it up as the best we can be. At some point, we have to decide that enough is enough.
