 (D-MA) and Congressman John Conyers (D-MI) to expand the federal government's jurisdiction over hate crimes with legislation such as the Local Law Enforcement Act of 2005 and other similar bills, legislation has not been enacted to expand the federal government's jurisdiction in this area. This legislation's opponents argue that hate crimes are best handled at the state and local levels, that the constitutional rationale for such federal legislation is weak, and that such legislation would be more symbolic than effective (Krouse & Beaver, 2006).
The U.S. Department of Justice records hate crime statistics using two distinct methods. The FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program publishes hate crimes as reported by state and local law enforcement agencies. The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) gathers data about crime victims through the National Crime Victimization Survey. Less than half of the crimes described to the BJS by victims as hate-related have been reported to law enforcement agencies. The BJS annual numbers are nine times higher than the FBI's statistics. This significant discrepancy suggests that the UCR seriously underreports incidents of hate crimes (Krouse & Beaver, 2006). Reasons for the FBI's underreporting of hate crimes include victims' fear of retribution against themselves, their family, or other group members; disagreements about whether violent crimes against women should be considered hate crimes (Gross, 1999; McPhail & DeNitto, 2005); difficulty in defining how much hate must be present for an act to be classified as a hate crime (McPhail, 2000); and victims' unwillingness to “out” themselves as a member of a stigmatized group (Swigonski, Mama, & Ward, 2006).
Social workers are in a key position to educate, help prevent, and ameliorate the devastating consequences of hate crimes from a variety of positions. They interact with those directly affected by hate crimes: victims, perpetrators, and family members. They also assist communities to prevent or handle instances of hate crimes and advocate for stronger hate crime–related public policies.
Many hate crime victims experience a series of attacks rather than a single episode (Barnes & Ephross, 1994). They feel overwhelmed, angry, fearful, and sad, and may make significant life changes in the wake of the hate crime. Some may suffer from post-traumatic stress syndrome (PTSS). Effective services to these individuals include intensive, short-term interventions best suited to their intense emotional reactions (Barnes & Ephross, 1994). Group services provide a supportive and therapeutic environment with others who have had similar experiences. As compared to victims of similar attacks not motivated by hate, hate crime victims are less likely to experience reduced self-esteem or to blame themselves for the crime and wonder if they should or could have behaved differently (Barnes & Ephross, 1994). In addition to helping individuals, social workers also intervene in systems: schools, communities, and organizations that have experienced instances of hate crimes.
Although victims understandably receive the most attention, hate crime perpetrators also require sustained interventions to control hateful actions. Research on the perpetrators of these crimes suggests they may be thrill-seekers, or they may be responding to a triggering incident, a delusion, or a hate group (Levin & McDevitt, 2002). While few hate crimes are directly linked to hate groups, such groups do create an atmosphere conducive to hate crimes (Jacobs & Potter, 1998). In this realm, counseling and violence prevention programs can be effective alternatives to prison environments, which can magnify feelings of hate and bias. As schools have experienced escalating violence, they have been receptive to innovative programs in violence reduction and prevention. In fact, many schools have a violence reduction or prevention program in place, focusing on skill building and sometimes individual counseling (Astor et al., 1998). School social workers working in concert with community groups could pr