Join ANA Log in
Join ANA Log in
  1. OJIN Homepage
  2. Table of Contents
  3. Volume 7 - 2002
  4. Number 1: January 2002
  5. Domestic Violence and Criminal Justice

Domestic Violence and the Criminal Justice System: An Overview

  • Edna Erez, LL.B., Ph.D.
    Edna Erez, LL.B., Ph.D.

    Edna Erez, L.L.B., Ph.D, has a law degree from Hebrew University of Jerusalem and a Ph.D. in sociology/criminology from the University of Pennsylvania. She also conducted postdoctoral studies in criminal justice evaluation research at the University of Southern California. Dr. Erez has been a research fellow at the Max Planck Institute of International and Comparative Criminal law in Freiburg, Germany, and at the Australian Institute of Criminology in Canberra, Australia. Dr. Erez was the Chair of the American Society of Criminology Task Force on Violence Against Women, which presented its report to Attorney General Janet Reno in 1995. Her research interests include sociology of law, victims of crime, and women in crime and justice. Her most recent research addresses violence against immigrant women and evaluation of intervention programs with woman batterers.

Contents
Abstract

It is only recently that domestic violence has been considered a violation of the law. Although men have battered, abused and mistreated their wives or intimate partners for a long time, historically, wife or partner abuse has been viewed as a "normal" part of marriage or intimate relationships. Only towards the end of the twentieth century, in the 1970's, has domestic violence been defined a crime, justifying intervention by the criminal justice system. This article surveys the history of domestic violence as a criminal offense, and the justice system response to woman battering incidents. It first discusses the definition of the offense including debates around the offense definition, and the prevalence and reported frequency of the behavior termed woman battering. It then reviews the legal and social changes over time that have altered the criminal justice system's approach to domestic violence. Next it outlines the responses of the police, and the prosecution of domestic violence. The article also discusses research findings related to domestic violence and the criminal justice system, along with current controversies concerning the justice approach to domestic violence, its law enforcement, and related unfolding trends in the movement to address domestic violence through the criminal justice system.

Key words: domestic violence, woman battering, policing, prosecution, adjudication, mandatory or presumed arrest policies, dual arrest, protection order, battered woman syndrome, no-drop policies

Introduction

DomesticviolenceisoneofthosegenderrelatedviolationsthathashadalongpastbutashorthistoryMenhavebattered,abusedandmistreatedtheirwivesorintimatepartnersforalongtimeHistorically,wifeorpartnerabusehasbeenviewedasa"normal"partofmarriageorintimaterelationships;anexperiencethatwomenwhohaveenteredmarriageorestablishedrelationshipsshouldexpect,ortolerateOnlytowardstheendofthetwentiethcentury,inthe1970's,hasdomesticviolencebeendefinedacrime,justifyinginterventionbythecriminaljusticesystem

Thisarticle,writtenfromtheperspectiveofdomesticviolenceandthecriminaljusticesystemintheUnitedStatesofAmerica(USA),surveysthehistoryofdomesticviolenceasacriminaloffense,andthejusticesystemresponsetowomanbatteringincidentsItfirstdiscussesthedefinitionoftheoffense,theprevalenceofthebehavioranditsreportedfrequencyItthenpresentsthelegalandsocialchangesovertimethathavealteredthecriminaljusticesystem'sapproachtodomesticviolenceNextitoutlinestheresponsesofthepolice,andtheprosecutionofdomesticviolenceThearticlealsodiscussesresearchfindingsrelatedtodomesticviolenceandthecriminaljusticesystem,alongwithcurrentcontroversiesrelatedtodomesticviolence,itslawenforcementandfuturetrendsinthemovementtoaddressdomesticviolencethroughthecriminaljusticesystem

DefinitionalandPrevalenceIssues

MostjurisdictionsintheUSAdefinethebehaviorofwifeabuseorintimateviolenceasdomesticviolenceCriminalcodesspecificallylistingthebehaviorasacrime(ratherthanmerelyaddressingitwithinthegenerallawofassault)refertoitasfamilyordomesticviolence

Therehasbeenmuchdebaterevolvingaroundtheuseoftheterm"domesticviolence"todescribeintimateviolenceorpartnerabuseResearchhasshownthatinviolencebetweenintimatepartners,menarecommonlytheaggressorsandwomentypicallyarethevictimsIntheoverwhelmingmajorityofcasesreportedtothepolice,andsubsumedunderthecategoryofdomesticviolenceinpolicerecords,womenarethevictimsForinstance,researchsuggeststhatabout85%oftheoffensessubsumedunderthecategoryofdomesticviolenceisviolencebetweenintimatepartners(currentorex-husbandsorboyfriends),inwhichthevictimistypicallyawomanandtheoffendertypicallythemanTherestofthepartiesincludeparents,siblings,in-laws,orroommates(Erez,1986;Erez&Kessler,1997)

Researchontheprevalenceoffamilyviolence(Straus&Gelles,1990),however,hassuggestedthatwomenareengagedinviolenceagainsttheirmalepartnersalmosttothesameextentasmenFeministresearchers(egKurz,1993),however,challengedtheterm"familyviolence"andtheconceptionofintimateviolenceas"mutualcombat"(Straus,1993)Theyarguethatthetermfamilyordomesticviolenceismisleadingbecauseitdisguisesthefactthatwomenaretypicallythevictimsindomesticviolence,andthatunderlyingtheabusivebehaviorismalecontrolanddominationTheyrecommendthatthetermfamilyviolencebereplacedwith"womanbattering",whichmoreaccuratelydescribesthemajorityofcasesofdomesticviolence(Kurz,1993)

Researchershavealsopointedoutthatalthoughtherearecasesinwhichwomenassaulttheirintimatepartners,theexperienceofwomenbeingbatteredbymenisdifferentfromthatofmalesbeingbatteredbyfemales

Researchalsodemonstratesthatmostviolentincidentswhichfindwomencastastheperpetratorsarecasesofself-defense(Dobash,Dobash,&Wilson1992)Manyofthesecasesincludesituationswherewomenwhohavesufferedabuseeitherinthespecificmomentor,morecommonly,overaprolongedperiodoftime,havereactedbydefendingthemselvesThesecasesincludewomenwhohavethwartedtheaggressionoftheirpartneroractedviolentlyduetotheextremelytenuouspsychologicalstatetheywereinfollowingalengthyandcontinuousabusebytheirbatterer(Browne,1987;Walker,1979)

Researchershavealsopointedoutthatalthoughtherearecasesinwhichwomenassaulttheirintimatepartners,theexperienceofwomenbeingbatteredbymenisdifferentfromthatofmalesbeingbatteredbyfemalesThedifferencesarequalitativeaswellasquantitative,andincludeconsiderationssuchasthefrequencyandseverityoftheabuse,itsmotivationandmeaningtothevictim,andthevictim'sabilitytoresisttheabuseortoseparatefromthebatterer(Johnson,1995)

Althoughconflictandaggressivebehaviorcharacterizemanymaritalorintimaterelationships,researchdemonstratesthatseriousharmfromabuseincidentsarecommonlyfoundincasesinwhichmenabusetheirfemalepartnersAswillbediscussedlater,thepresumedreciprocityofviolenceinmaritalcouplesorintimaterelationshipshashadramificationsforbatteredwomen'sencounterswithpolice,particularlyforarrestoutcomesIncreaseinarrestratesfollowinglegalreformsofmandatoryorpresumedarresthasbeenpartiallyrelatedtothe"dualarrest"policy,namely,policeinclinationtoarrestboththemaleperpetratorandhisfemalepartner,becauseinmostdomesticviolenceencountersthepartiesinvolvedtendtofilechargesandcounter-charges(Martin,1997)Anobservedincreasedarrestrateofwomenindomesticviolencecaseshasbeenattributedtothispolicy(Ferraro,1989a);thecriminaljusticesystemresponsehasnotalwaysbeencommensuratewiththeharmexperiencedbyvictimsofbattering

Researchsuggeststhattheprevalenceandfrequencyofthebehaviortermeddomesticviolenceishigh,regardlessofthemethodemployedtostudyitsextent(Worden,2000a)Thereisevidencetosuggestthatestimatesofintimateviolenceproducedbyvariousstudiesemployingdifferentmethodsarelowerthattheirtrueincidence,asvictimsofintimateviolencetendtounderreportthebehaviortoresearchersPolicerecordsprovideevenalowerestimateoftheincidenceofdomesticviolence,asmanyvictimsavoidreportingthevictimizationtothepolice

VictimsrefrainfromreportingabusetoofficialsformanyreasonsOftentimesinthebeginningoftherelationship,victimsfeelshame,guiltorinadequacyabouttheirpresumedcontributiontotheconflictOtherreasonsincludefearoflosingthefinancialoreconomicsupporttheabuserprovides,desiretokeepthefamilyunitintact,concernfortheirchildren,emotionalattachmenttotheabuser,andperceivedorreallackofoptionstoleavetheabuserandbecomeselfsustainingFearoftheabuserbecomesamajorreasonfornon-reportingoftheviolenceastheviolenceincreasesorintensifies(Erez&Belknap,1998a;1998b)Abusersoftenthreatentokilltheirpartnersiftheyleave,andresearchhasshownthatsuchthreatsneedtobetakenseriously,as"separationassault"(Mahoney,1991)isacommonsituationinwhichvictimsareinjuredorevenkilledVictimstendtoreportthebehaviortothepoliceonlyafteralongperiodofabuse,oncetheyreachthepointof"enoughisenough"(Fischer&Rose,1995)Thispointisreachedafterabusehasescalatedoverasustainedperiodoftime,andhasbecomeserious,frequentorunpredictable,oftenwithaccompaniedthreatsorpalpablerisktotheirchildren(Erez&Belknap,1998a;1998b;Fischer&Rose,1995)

Intimateviolencedefinedascriminalincludesrelatedoffensessuchasstalking,whichoftentakesplaceafterarelationshiphasendedDomesticviolenceandstalkingoccurbetweensamesexrelationshipsandbetweenpastrelationships(ex-spousesandex-boyfriend/girlfriend)Thereare,however,manyformsofabusebetweencurrentandpastrelationshipsthatarenotconsideredcriminaloffenses,eventhoughtheyarepartoftheabusepatternandtheyoftenprecede,co-occurorevensubstituteforphysicalviolenceTheseformsincludeverbalabuse,psychologicalabuse,controlofeconomicopportunities,resourcesorfinances,propertydamage,harmingpetsandmakingthreatstothevictim'schildren(Tong,1984)Althoughsomeofthesebehaviorsmaybeillegalinothercontexts,manyofthemremainoutsidetheordinaryreachofthecriminallawandthejusticesystemiftheyoccurwithinthecontextofintimaterelationships

Forthepurposeofthisarticle,domesticviolenceisdefinedasthreateningorinjuriousphysical,psychological,sexual,verbaloreconomicbehaviordirectedtowardanintimatepartner,regardlessofmaritalstatusorwhetherthebehavioroccurswithincurrentorterminatedrelationshipsBecausemostactsofdomesticviolenceareperpetratedbymenagainstwomen,womanbatteringisthefocusofthisarticle

TheJusticeSystemResponsetoDomesticViolence:HistoricalBackground

Domesticviolenceappearstobeaculturaluniversal;itshistoricalrootsareasancientastheyaredeep

Domesticviolenceappearstobeaculturaluniversal;itshistoricalrootsareasancientastheyaredeepTheemergenceofmonogamouspairingrelationships,designedtoprovidewomenprotectionfromviolationbymenotherthantheirspousesandguaranteehusbandstheiridentitiesandrightsasfathers,resultedinadependencystatusofwivesinthelegal,socialandeconomicspheres(Martin,1976)ThemonogamousmarriagewascharacterizedbydifferentialpowerbetweenthepartnersThewife'ssolepurposewastosatisfyherhusband'sneeds,bearinghischildrenandtendingtohishousehold(Martin,1976)Inmedievaltimes,husbandshadthepoweroflifeanddeathovertheirdependentsandtherighttounrestrainedphysicalchastisementofmembersofthehousehold,includingtheirwivesandchildren(Pleck,1987)Physicalcruelty,includingmurderofawifeoraserf,wasallowedaslongasitwasinflictedfordisciplinarypurposes(Davis,1971)Womenwerekilledbytheirhusbandsforreasonssuchastalkingback,scoldingandnagging,andmiscarryingchildren(Martin,1976)

TheEnglishcommonlaw,inthenameoftheprotectionofthefamily,providedhusbandstherighttochastisetheirwivesonly"moderately"Itexcludeddeath(Blackstone,1987,p177)TheEnglishlaw,whichwasbroughttotheAmericancolonies,allowedhusbandstoretaintheirrighttophysicallychastisetheirwives,aslongastheydidnotuseasticklargerthantheirthumb(theoriginoftheexpression"theruleofthumb")InBradleyvState(1824),theMississippiStateSupremecourtaffirmedtherighttheofhusbandtoexercisemoderatechastisementindisciplininghiswifeThecourtalsostatedthatfamilyargumentswerebestleftinsidethewallsofthehomeandwerenotpropermattersforthecourttointerveneThispositionwasreinforcedbyothercases,whichheldthatthecourtcouldnotinvadethedomesticdomainunlesssomelastinginjurywasinflicted,orexcessiveviolencewasusedonlytogratify"badpassions"(StatevBlack,1864andStatevOliver1979)Thecourtsrecognizedthehusband'srighttousethenecessarydegreeofforcetocompelthewifeto"behave"and"knowherplace"(JoynervJoyner,1962)

Theprotectionofthefamilywasalsothemajorreasonforadefactodecriminalizationofwifeabuse

Thesubjugationofthewifetothehusband'sauthoritywasreflectedinthemarriagecontractThroughmarriage,thewomanhadtogiveuphername,movetoherhusband'shome,andbecomehisdependentThemarriagevowrequiredthewifeto"love,honorandobey"herhusbandThevariousrestrictionsonthewifethroughthemarriagecontract(suchasinabilitytoownormanageproperty,enterintocontractsorsue)madethewifeeconomicallyandlegallydependentonherhusbandThisdependencyhasbeen"justified"bythestate'soverridinginterestinkeepingthefamilyintactTheprotectionofthefamilywasalsothemajorreasonforadefactodecriminalizationofwifeabuseThesanctityofthefamilyhomeandthechargethat"aman'shomeishiscastle"ledtotreatingspouseabusemanifestlydifferentthanassaultsbetweenpersonswhowerenotintimatesBecausethewifewasviewedasbelongingtoherhusband,whathappenedbetweenthemwasregardedasaprivatematterandwasnotaconcerntothecriminaljusticesystem(Dobash&Dobash,1979)

AmajorchangeinthelegalrightsofmarriedwomenintheUSAoccurredattheendofthe19thcenturyManyofthelegalrestrictionsonthemwereliftedandtherightofthehusbandtochastisehiswifewasabolishedMuchofwhattodayisconsidered"domesticviolence"wasconsideredacceptable,ifnotrecommended,behavioracenturyago(Pleck,1987)Inthelatenineteenthcentury,lawmakersandjudgeswerestillconsideringwhetherahusband'sphysicalassaulttowardshiswifewasacriminalact,sufficienttoserveasgroundsfordivorce,orwhetheritwasmerelyanacceptablewayofcorrectinghermisbehavior(Dobash&Dobash,1979)Yetrelativetocriminaljustice,thebeliefthatphysicalabuseinspousalrelationshipsdoesnotconstituteacrimecontinuedtoguidethepoliceintheirresponsetodomesticviolencecasesuntilthe1970sAslongasthechastisingofwomendidnotresultinseriousinjury,thecriminaljusticesystemwouldnotintervene

Theactivitiesofthewomen'smovementinthe1970s,togetherwithconcurrentadvocacyonbehalfofvictimsofcrime,particularlyvictimsofrapeanddomesticviolence,havebeeninstrumentalinchangingtheprevailingapproachtodomesticviolenceTheycalledattentiontotheplightofvictimsinthecriminaljusticesystem,especiallytofemalevictimsofdomesticviolenceandsexualassaultwhoseneglectandinvisibilityinthecriminaljusticeprocesswasjustsurfacingTheytransformeddomesticviolencefromaprivateissuetoapublicconcern,andredefineditasacrimeandlawviolationwarrantingcriminaljusticeinterventionTheimpunityofbatterersandperpetratorsofgenderviolencetocriminalchargeswaschallengedandthemessagethatviolenceagainstwomenisnotaseriousoffensewasreversedNolongercouldperpetratorsavoidresponsibilityforinflictinginjuriesontheirfemalepartners,andthelegaldistinctionbetweenviolentactsthatarecriminaltowardsstrangersyettoleratedtowardsintimatepartners,specificallyfemalepartners,begantofadeawayYet,theperceptionofwifeabuseasdifferentfromotherassaultsretainssomeofitsspecialstatusincriminallawLongafterwifebatteringwasformallydefinedasacriminaloffense,manystatescontinuedtodefinesexualassaultorrapeascriminalonlywhenthecomplainingpartywasnotthewifeoftheperpetratorSomestatesmaintainthisdualstandardeventoday(Ryan,1996;Zorza,1992)

Theemergenceofthebatteredwomensheltersmovement(Loseke,1991),togetherwithgrassrootsadvocacyorganizations,calledforlegalandpracticalsolutionstodomesticviolencevictimsInparticular,shorttermsolutionssuchasshelterstohouseabusedwomenwerecreated,andlongtermsolutions,suchasreorientinggenderrolestowardequalitybetweenthesexesandestablishinglegalreformsintheinstitutionofmarriagewerebegun(Pence,1983;Schechter,1982)Inaddition,variousgroupsonbehalfofwomendirectedattentiontotheasymmetryinpowerrelationshipsunderlyingpartnerviolence,andchallengedbarrierstowomen'srightsandequalityTheyarguedforgreatersocialconcernforwomenandchildren,andlegitimizedtheneedsofwomenandchildrenwhosankdeeperintopovertybecauseofunfairwelfarepracticeswhicheconomicallypenalizedthemforthenegligentbehavioroftheirhusbands(Worden,2000a)Callsforthereformofthecriminaljusticesystemfollowed,andeffortsdirectedbyactivists,practitioners,andscholarstorestructurethecriminaljusticesystemresponsetodomesticviolenceaddressedthevariouscomponentsofthecriminaljusticesystem:police,prosecutionandadjudicationofdomesticviolence,andinterventionprogramsforbatterers

criminaljusticesystemsarelimitedintheircapabilitiestorespondtoreforms,andpastpracticestendtopersistorfadeslowly

Asthefollowingsectionsdemonstrate,studiesofcriminaljusticereformshaveproducedconflictingresultsorqualifiedconclusions,andthishasposeddifficultiesintranslatingthemintopracticalrecommendationsThechallengeforthecriminaljusticesysteminfindinganeffectiveresponsetodomesticviolencehascontinuedasnewlydiscoveredissuesemergewhileacceptedknowledgeonthissubjectisquestionedThiscontinuoussearchforsolutionsandwaystocombatorreducedomesticviolencerequiresconstantrevisionofpracticesandpoliciesasnewknowledgeandskillstrainingbecomeavailableSuchadaptationisnoteasilyaccomplished,ascriminaljusticesystemsarelimitedintheircapabilitiestorespondtoreforms,andpastpracticestendtopersistorfadeslowly

PoliceResponsetoDomesticViolence:ReformsandEvaluativeResearch

Policearethefirstlineofdefenseforvictimsingeneral,andvictimsofdomesticviolenceinparticularThevictimizationincasesofdomesticviolenceisoftenperpetratedbehindcloseddoors,withnoonetowitnessitIftherearefamilymembersinthehouseholdwhowitnesstheviolencetheymaybeapprehensiveabouttestifying;moreoftenthannottheyshyawayfromhavingtotakesidesamidstdualorconflictingloyalties

ThefirstcontactthevictimandoffenderhavewiththecriminaljusticesystemislikelytobethepoliceThisinitialcontactwasfoundtobeparticularlyimportantwithdomesticviolencevictimsIfthepoliceresponseisconsidered"inadequate",itnegativelyaffectsthevictims'selfesteemandmakesthemlesslikelytoturntothecriminaljusticesysteminthefuture(Brown,1984;Erez&Belknap,1998a;1998b)

ChangesinPoliceResponsestoDomesticViolence

Inthepast,therehavebeenthreemajorpoliceresponsestoaddressdomesticviolencecallsintheUSA:non-intervention,mediationandarrestUntilthe1960's,thetypicalpoliceresponsetodomesticviolencecallswasnon-intervention,astraditionallytheprevailingviewoflawenforcementagents(orthelegalsystemingeneral)wasthatdomesticviolenceisaprivatematter,andthat"aman'shomeishiscastle"TherewasnoperceivedneedorjustificationforoutsideinterventioninfamilialmattersMostpoliceandotherjusticeofficialsbelievedthatdomesticviolencewasbesthandledwithinthehome(Erez&Belknap,1995)ArrestinmisdemeanordomesticviolencewasrarelyperformedPoliceattachedlowprioritytotheseincidentsInpoliceculture,interventionindomesticsituationswasnotperceivedas"real"policework;spousalabusewasviewedasunglamorousandunrewarding(Straus,1980)Further,policetendedtoignoresuchcallsorpurposelydelayedrespondingtothemforseveralhours(Buzawa&Buzawa,1996)Researchhasshownthatresponsetimefordomesticviolencecaseswashigherinthe1970scomparedtothe1980s(Oppenlander,1982)

Althoughapatternofunder-enforcementofdomesticviolencecallswasdiscerned(Erez,1986;Oppenlander,1982),itwasnotclearwhetherdomesticviolencewasunder-enforcedrelativetoothercrimes,andwhetheritwasrelatedtolegalrequirementswhichbarredofficersinmanystatesfrommakingwarrantlessarrestForinstance,somestatelawsrequirethatmisdemeanoroffensesbecommittedinthepresenceofanofficerOtherpossibleexplanationsforthelowlevelofarrestinclude:theerroneousperceptionbypolicethatdomesticviolenceincidentsposeheightenedriskleveltotheofficer,victimpreferencesagainstarrest,andpossibleofficers'supportorsympathyfortheabusivemalepartner(Sherman,1992)

Thepolicyofavoidingarrestindomesticviolencereceivedsomeprofessionalattentioninthe1960sSocialscientistsandpsychologistsbegantoadvocatemediationin"familydisturbances"incidents(Bard,1970)Thissecondapproach,mediation,todomesticviolencepromotedsomeformofcrisisintervention,whichoftenincludedseparationoftheparties,reconciliation,ormediationandreferraltosocialserviceagencies(Erez&Belknap,1995)Policeacrossthecountryreceivedtraininginmediationandmanypolicedepartmentsestablishedfamilycrisisinterventionunits(Bard,1970)Somepolicedepartmentsevenincludedsocialworkersintheirnewlyestablishedcrisisteams(Burnett,Carr,Silapi&Taylor,1976)

ThisapproachresultedinfurtherdecreaseinarrestincitiesinwhichcrisisinterventionwaspracticedFurther,ithasbeenreportedthatmediationtrainingtaughtofficersthatitisbettertosidewiththebatterersthanitistosidewiththevictims(Oppenlander,1982;Tong,1984)andreinforcedalineofthinkingthatemphasizedhowvictims'behaviormighthave"caused"offenders'behavior(Rowe,1985;Zoomer,1989)

SincepoliceofficersfrequentlyarrivedatthesceneatthepointreferredtobyWalker(1979)asthe"reconciliationphase,"suchstrategiesfitinwelltheideaofmediationTheoffenderusuallywantedtheincidenttobesettledinanon-formalmannerThismediationresultedinkeepingdomesticviolenceoutofthecriminaljusticesystem(Rowe,1985)

Inthe1980s,feminists'callsforchangecombinedwithconservatives'callsforsolvingsocialproblemsthroughlawenforcementresultedindemandsforamoreaggressiveroleforpoliceofficers

Inthe1980s,feminists'callsforchangecombinedwithconservatives'callsforsolvingsocialproblemsthroughlawenforcementresultedindemandsforamoreaggressiveroleforpoliceofficerstorespondtodomesticviolenceBoththepoliceandwomen'sgroupsrejectedmediationstrategiesForpoliceofficers,mediationseemedmorelikesocialworkthanactivitiessuitableforpoliceworkThepolicewerealsoillpreparedtoperformcrisisintervention(Langley&Levy,1977;1978)Further,therewasnoevidencetosuggestthatmediationwasusefulinlong-termeffortstoreducerecidivismofdomesticviolence(Sherman,1992)Women'sgroupsobjectedtothemediationapproachbecauseitignoredorunderplayedthedangertowomeninabusiverelationshipsWomen'sadvocatesfurtherregardedmediationasfundamentallyflawed,becauseitassumesequalityofculpabilitybetweenthepartiestoadisputeandfailstoholdtheoffenderaccountableforhisactions(Rowe,1985)Women'sgroupsarguedthatmediationpoliciesindomesticviolencecasesinadvertentlycontributedtoadangerousescalationoftheviolence

Insomejurisdictions(egNewYork,CaliforniaandConnecticut)women'sgroupsbegantofilesuitsagainstpolicedepartmentsonbehalfofabusedwomenwhomthepolicefailedtoprotectbyarrestingtheabuser(Erez&Beldnap,1995)Theysucceededinreceivinghighsettlementsorcourtjudgementsagainstthepolicewhowerefoundnegligentinprotectingabusedwomenfromtheirabusivehusbands/partners(Erez&Beldnap,1995)

Thetrendawayfrommediationandtowardthethirdresponse,namely,arrestasacriminaljusticeresponsetodomesticviolence,wasreinforcedbyfindingsoftheMinneapolisdomesticviolenceexperiment(Sherman&Berk,1984)Thiscontrolledexperimentalstudyrandomlyassignedcasestothreetypesoftreatment:separationofparties,mediationoradvising,andarrestItsfindingssuggestedthatarresthasadeterrenteffectonthebatterer,andleadstoreductioninrepeatedviolenceTheUSAttorneyGeneral'sTaskForceonFamilyViolence(1984)citedthestudyassufficientevidenceforadoptingpro-arrestpoliciesnationally,andshortlythereafter,by1989,overthreequartersofjurisdictionsaroundthecountryhadamendedtheirlawstoallowforwarrantlessmisdemeanorarrestsindomesticviolenceManypolicedepartmentshaverevisedtheirpoliciestoincludearrestasapresumedormandatoryresponsetodomesticviolence,andcorrespondingly,thenumberofarrestsinmisdemeanorcaseshaverisennationallybyabout70%from1985to1989(Sherman,1992)

Inadditiontoreformspertainingtowarrantlessarrestsinmisdemeanorassaults,legalchangeshaveincludedprimaryaggressoridentificationrequirementsinarrestcasesasacorrectivetodualarrestpracticesThepracticeofarrestingbothpartieswhencross-complaintsarefiledhasledtoasharpincreaseinthenumberoffemalesarrestedindomesticviolence(Ferraro,1989a),andhasfurthervictimizedmanybatteredwomenwhoactaggressivelywhendefendingthemselvesagainstthebattering

EvaluatingMandatory/PresumedArrestPoliciesandOtherReforms

Researchhasdemonstratedthatevenwhenlaworpolicydictatearrest,thepolicestillexercisediscretioninfindingthatacrimehasoccurred,anddonotalwaysusearrestasaresponsetodomesticviolenceForinstance,considerationssuchasanofficers'interpretationorunderstandingofthelaw;ideologicalfactorsorthebeliefsofficersholdregardingbatteredwomen;practicalconsiderationssuchastheamountofworkinvolvedinprocessinganarrestcomparedtothelikelihoodofareprimandforfailingtodoso;andpoliticalissuessuchastherelationshipsbetweenpolicedepartmentadministratorsandstreetofficers,areallfactorsthataffectthedecisiontoarrestbatterers(Ferraro,1989a)Therefore,eveninstatesthathaveadoptedmandatoryorpresumedarrestpolicies,thenumberofarrestsfordomesticviolencehasnotincreasedsignificantlycomparedtothepre-mandatory/presumedarresteraForexample,arecentOhiostudyofpolicereportsofdomesticviolenceincidentssuggeststhattherateofarresthasincreasedfromabout12-18%inthepast(Erez1986)toabout32%,withvarioushigherorlowerratesfordifferenttypesofdomesticviolencecases(Erez&Kessler,1997)Forinstance,violationofprotectionordershasaveryhigharrestrate--around75%--butthearrestrateforassaultisonlyaround25%(Erez&Kessler,1997)

Therearealsomanyotherreasonsforwhichpoliciessuchasarrest(aswellasprosecutionoradjudication)maynotbeenforcedaslawmakershaveenvisionedForinstance,legalagentswhomaybeskepticalabouttheasymmetryofviolencebehavior,orwhodonotviewdomesticviolencecomplaintsasseriousorappropriatereasonforintervention(Belknap,1995),maybeinclinedtointerpretthecriminallawverystrictlyforarrestorprosecutionpurposes(Johnson,Sigler&Crowley,1994),oratthesametimebetolerantofphysicalaggressionthatcouldberationalizedaspunishmentforwomen'smaritalinadequacies(Saunders,1995)Suchagentsareinclinedtodefinemaritalviolenceasacivilmatterintendedforresolutionindivorcecourtsratherthanunderthepurviewofthecriminalcourts(Johnson,Sigler&Crowley,1994)

Practitionersholddiverseattitudesconcerningdomesticviolencethatmaycolortheirinterpretationofthelawaswellastheirwillingnessormotivationtoenforceit(Belknap,1995)Althoughtheseattitudescanbechangedthroughtrainingand/orexperience,localpractitioners'pre-existingattitudesmaybeacriticalfactorintheirwillingnessorabilitytoenforcethelawReformsinlawenforcementoftenrequirepractitionerstochangepastpracticesorrevisedeeplyentrenchedbeliefsandviewsaboutthephenomenontheyarechargedtoenforce(Worden,2000a)Thedegreeofsuccessinchangingtheseattitudesvariesconsiderably

feministscholarshavearguedthatthemandatoryorpresumedarrestresponsedepriveswomenofachoiceinwhethertohavetheirabuserarrested

Theeffectivenessofarrestasaresponseforpolicingdomesticviolencehasbeenconfirmedbysomereplicationstudiesbuthasnotbeensupportedbyothers(Sherman,1992)Thedeterrenteffectofarrestindomesticviolencecasesremainsdebatable(egBinder&Meeker,1992),althoughthemostrecentevidencesuggeststhatbatterersdesistfromre-offendingfollowingarrest(Maxwell,Garner&Fagan,2001)Somescholarscontinuetoadvocatepro-arrestpolicies,suggestingthatarrestsendsamessagetothebattererthatthebehavioriscriminalandunacceptable,andprotectswomenbyinsuringthatthelawisproperlyenforcedOthers,particularlyfeministscholarshavearguedthatthemandatoryorpresumedarrestresponsedepriveswomenofachoiceinwhethertohavetheirabuserarrested,andignorestheneedsofabusedwomenintermsofreferralsorprovisionofresources(Stanko,1995)Stillothersthinkthatarrestaloneisineffectiveinhaltingthelong-termprogressionofviolenceoftenmanifestedbysociallymarginaloffenders(forwhomthestudieshavequestionedallalongthepresumeddeterrenteffectofarrest)

Alternativestoarrest,usuallyintheformofcrisisinterventionapproach,provideviableoptionsfordomesticviolencevictimswhennoinjuryisinvolvedSocialactivistsarguethatheavyemphasisonarrestasapanaceafordomesticviolencedetractsfromtheroleofcommunityattitudesandpracticesindeterminingthescopeandnatureoftheproblemFurtherpreoccupationwithpro-arrestpolicesresultsinfocusingontheindividual,ratherthanacknowledgingsocietalfactorsthatperpetuatedependencyofwomenonbatterers(Ferraro,1989b)Someexpertshavealsocriticizedthelackofcoordinationamongthepolice,thejudiciaryandsocialservicesinrespondingtodomesticviolence(Gamache,Edleson&Schock,1988)orgenerallyinpromotingcommunitycoordinatedresponsestodomesticviolence(Worden,2000a)Thelowprobabilityofprosecutioninspousalabusecases,togetherwiththefactthatarrestisonlyaminornuisancetotheabuserwhoisusuallyoutofjailwithinafewhoursfollowingthearrest,furtherexplainsthelackofdeterrenteffectarresthasonmanybatterers(Hirschel,Hutchinson&Dean1992;Lerman,1992)

FeministshavealsoarguedthatthefindingsfromexperimentalresearchhavebeeninterpretedonlyfromtheviewpointoftheabuserandignoredtheperspectivesofthebatteredwomenForinstance,thesupposeddeterrenteffectofarrestonemployedmiddleclassmen(presumablythosewithasocialbondtosociety,thusthosewhoaremostamenabletodeterrencethrougharrestresponse)couldbeattributedtothefactthatmiddleclasswomenwouldnotwanttojeopardizetheircomfortablelifestylebyhavingtheirproviderarrestedFurther,thebeliefthattheemploymentstatusoftheoffenderisimportant,asSherman,1992,hassuggested,ignorestheimportanceoftheemploymentstatusofvictimsWomenwhoareemployedaremoreabletosuccessfullyleavebatteringrelationshipthantheirunemployedcounterparts(Erez&Belknap,1998a;1998b)Anotherpossibilityisthatinner-citypoorwomencontinuetobevictimizedbyrepeatedabusebecause,unliketheirmiddleclasswealthiercounterparts,theycannoteasilyfindalternativelivingarrangementsandsocialservicesforthemselvesandtheirchildrenThusaninner-city,poor,batteredwomanhasnoalternativebuttoremaininherplacelikea'˜sittingduck'fortheabuserwhenhereturns(Bowman,1992)

TheattentiontoarresthashadsomeadvantagesinregardtothecriminaljusticeresponsetodomesticviolenceFirst,thefocusonpoliceresponsehasbeenevaluatedalmostexclusivelyintermsofthearrestvsmediationdecisionClearlythereareotheractionspolicecantake,inadditiontoarrestingbattererswhenrespondingtodomesticviolencecallsForinstance,theuseofreferralsbypoliceseemscrucialforinformingbatteredwomenandtheirviolatorsofavailableprograms,sheltersandlegalrights(Belknap&McCall,1995)ToolittleattentionhasbeenpaidtothisimportantfunctionofthepoliceindomesticviolenceSecond,theresearchagendafocusingonthedeterrenteffectofpro-arrestpolicieshaslimitedthedefinitionof"success"toincludeonlywhetherarrestingbatterersaffectstheirrecidivismThisfocusignoresotherinfluencesthatarrestmighthaveonvictims,suchasprovidingthemanopportunitytoescapewithorwithouttheirchildren,aswellascriminaljusticeagents'communicatingtovictimsandtheirchildrenthatthebatterer'sbehaviorisreprehensibleandinfactacrimeSuchexplicitcommunicationsarecrucialforassistingbattered,immigrantwomen,whooftendonotknowthatwomanbatteringisacrime(Erez,forthcoming),orthathelpandservicesareavailabletobatteredwomen,regardlessoftheirimmigrationstatus(Erez,2000;Erez,forthcoming)

TheProsecutionandAdjudicationofDomesticViolence

Theprosecutionandadjudicationofbatteringcaseshasreceivedlesserattention(forexceptionsseeFord&Regoli,1992;Schmidt&Steury,1989)Thebehaviorofthepoliceissignificantastheyarethefirsttoappearatthescene,andtheyserveasthegatekeeperstothecriminalprocessingsystemHowever,theultimatepurposeofpoliceactionistochanneldeservingcasesforprosecutionandadjudicationTheelementofdeterrenceunderlyingthecriminalizationofdomesticviolenceandthearrestofbattererscanonlybefulfillediftheperpetratorsaretried,convicted,andpunished(Hart,1993;Lerman,1981)Theprosecutionandadjudicationstagesareconsequentialforperpetrators--decidingtheirguiltorinnocence,creatingacriminalrecordandimposingapenaltyButtheyareevenmoreimportantforbatteredwomen,influencingtheirdeterminationtoaccesstothelegalsystemByconvictingbatterers,thelawreaffirmsvictims'descriptionsofabusivebehavior,andrejectsabusers'versionsofeventsorlegaldefensesResearchhasclearlydemonstratedthattherearevastdifferencesbetweenmen'sandwomen'sreportsoftheabusiveincidentsandrelationships(Dobash,Dobash,Cavanagh&Lewis,1998)Thesymbolicmessagethelawsendsthroughtheapprobationofwomen'sabusecomplaintsiscriticalindeterminingtheirwillingnesstomobilizethelawtoresistintimateviolence

UsingtheCriminalJusticeParadigmforDomesticViolence:DilemmasandDifficulties

ThecriminaljusticeparadigmisproblematicforprocessingdomesticviolencecasesforacombinationofreasonsOnereasonisthatthepoliceorcriminaljusticeresponseisreactive(victimsoftenrefrainfromreportingtheirvictimization)Also,domesticviolenceofteninvolvesaseriesofincidents,sometimeswithescalatingseriousness,withlittlephysicalevidence,andoftennowitnessesThecasesareoftenchargedasmisdemeanors;andbecauseofthehighattritionrate,offendersdonotaccumulatecriminalrecordsthatmightinfluenceprosecutors'(andjudges')futureestimatesofdangerousness,orrisktothevictim(Worden,2000a)Also,theadversarialnatureofthecriminaljusticeprocesspresupposesthatbothsidesarecommittedtowinning"theircases"andthatvictimsprimarilyseekpublicconvictionandpunishmentTheadversarialprocessalsopresupposesfinancialandpersonalindependenceofthepartiesYet,researchhasshownthatvictimshavevariousmotivationsforseekingcriminaljusticeintervention,mostofwhicharenotrelatedtopunishingtheirbatterers(Ford,1991;Ford&Regoli,1993)Further,victimsareofteninterdependentwithordependentontheirabusersinbothpersonalandeconomicdimensions(Worden,2000a)Victimsalsofacelegalissuessuchascustodyandchildvisitationintheircases,thatmaybesettledinadifferentvenuethanthecriminalcourtTherefore,somescholarshavearguedthatdomesticviolencecasesrequireamodifiedframeofreference,orcustomizedproceedingstoaddressdomesticabuserelatedviolationsInparticular,theysuggestadjudicationwhichinvolvescommunityprocessingandcommunitycourts,bothofwhichwouldaddresstheunderlyingprobleminitsbroadersocialcontext,itsconsequences,andrelationships,ratherthanmerelythespecificincidentorindividualcase(Worden,2000a)

domesticviolenceofteninvolvesaseriesofincidents,sometimeswithescalatingseriousness,withlittlephysicalevidence,andoftennowitnesses

TypicalBatteringCasesAdjudicatedbytheCourts:ResearchFindings

Extantresearchonthedimensions,dynamicsandconsequencesofwomanbatteringprovidethefollowingtypicalattributesofvictimswhoappealtothecriminaljusticesystem'sandtheirbatteringincidents:batteredwomenwhoappealforreliefandprotectionfromintimateviolencehavebeenphysicallyandsexuallyassaultedbytheirabusers,havesufferedpsychologicalandphysicalinjuries,havebeenthreatenedwithorwithoutweaponsdrawnatthem,andhavelivedwiththeirchildreninfearforanextendedperiodoftime(forarecentsummaryoftherealityof,andmythsconcerning,womanbatteringseePagelow,1997)Batteredwomenareparticularlyindangeriftheywanttoseparate;theyareoftenassaultedwhentheyattempttoleaveabusiverelationships(Browne,1987)experiencingwhathasbeenreferredtoasa"separationassault"(Mahoney,1991)Beforebatteredwomenseekhelpfromthecriminaljusticesystem,theyhavealreadyenduredvariousformsofcontinuousandsevereabuseatthehandsoftheirpartners(Erez&Belknap,1998a;1998b)

Researchalsosuggeststhatwhenbatteredwomenfirstapproachthejusticesystemtheytendtounderplaytheextentoftheirinjuries,feelshameandguiltabouttheirvictimization,andareveryhesitanttomobilizethesystemfortheirprotectionBeforecallingthepolice,theyhavetriedeverypossibleavenueofnon-incriminatoryinterventionstrategies,includingtheuseofavailablesocialservices,counselingandtreatmentoptions,aswellasmobilizingthehelpoffamilyandfriends(Erez&Belknap,1998a;1998b)Thepolicemostoftenaretheagencyoflastresort

Studiessuggestthatwhenwomenreciprocatewithviolence,theycommonlyactinself-defense,afterallpreviousattemptstostopthebatteringhavefailed(Dobash,Dobash&Wilson,1992;Schwartz&Dekesseredy,1993)Recentchangesinarrestpolicieshaveresultedinanincreaseinthenumberofwomenarrestedfordomesticviolence(Ferraro,1989a;Hamberger,1997)However,preliminaryresultssuggestthattheoverwhelmingmajorityoffemaleoffendersindomesticviolencecasesactedinself-defense,orretaliatedagainstpreviousassaultorabuseAsubstantialproportionofwomenalsousedaggressiontoexpressfeelingssuchasfrustrationoranxiety(Hamberger,1997)

victimshaveaimsotherthanconvictionwhenpursuingacaseagainsttheirbatterer

ResearchalsoindicatesthatwomenwhoappealtojusticeagentsforhelpareoftennottakenseriouslyTheirinjuriesmaybeminimized,andtheyareoftentimesdiscouragedfrompursuingthecasefurther(Erez&Belknap,1998a;1998b;Ferraro,1989;Lerman,1986)Mostcommonly,womenwhocontactthepoliceoftenchoosenottofollowthroughwiththecasebecausetheyaretooafraidofthebatterer(Cannavale,1976;Ford,1983;Erez&Belknap,1998a;1998b)

Studiesofwomanbatteringunderlinethekeyrolethat"fearofreprisal"playsinbatteredwomen'sreluctancetoinvolvecriminaljusticesystemagents,particularlyincasesofhighlyviolentbatterers(Ewing,1987;McLeod,1983;Singer,1988)Batteredwomenalsofailto"cooperate"whenseriousassaultsagainstthemareclassifiedasmisdemeanors(Hart,1993;Langan&Innes,1986)Womenloseinterestinprosecutionwhentheirvictimizationistrivialized,concluding"thecostsandrisksofprosecutionoutweighthepotentialconsequencesforassailants"(Hart,1993,p627)

Researchonvictims'motivation,andself-definedneedsrelativetoprosecution,hasshownthatvictimshaveaimsotherthanconvictionwhenpursuingacaseagainsttheirbattererForinstance,victimsengagethecriminaljusticesystemforpracticalreasons,suchasprotectingthemselvesfromviolence,attemptingtogethelpfortheirbatterer,andendeavoringtoenforcecollectionofchildsupportorrecoverpropertyVictimstendtowithdrawfromprosecutiononcetheyhavereachedtheirgoalsoraccomplishedtheiraimsVictimsdonotwithdrawbecauseofsecondthoughtsabouttheirintimatepartners,butbecausetheyhaveachievedthepragmaticobjectivesthatmotivatedthemtolodgethecomplaint(Ford,1991;Ford&Burke,1987;McLeod,1983)Contrarytothecriminaljusticeparadigm,victimsrarelyseekpubliccondemnationorpunishmentoftheirbatterers(Lerman,1981;Worden,2000a)

Researchthathasaddressedtheadjudicationofdomesticviolencecasesincourthasdemonstratedthatcasescommonlyincludemoreseriouscasesofbattering,withhigherlevelsofinjuryandfrequencyTheyaremorelikelytoreflect"patriarchalterrorism"ratherthan"commoncoupleviolence"(Johnson,1995)Yet,defenseattorneys'discourseaboutbattering,andbatterers'defensetacticsorexcuses,reflectthelatterratherthantheformerCourtdiscourseanddefensesagainstwomanbatteringchargesaredominatedbymalebatterers'viewsandstereotypesofwomen;attorneyswhodefendbattererscommonlyquestionthementalhealthofthevictim,orarguethatthevictimhasbeentheprimaryaggressor,iethebattereractedinselfdefenseagainstheraggression(Erez&King,2000)Victims'batteringexperiencesareoftendeniedandminimizedincourt,andcasesthatreachthecourtarereferredtobyattorneysasafew"true"or"real"casesofdomesticviolence(Bowker,1983;Erez&King,2000;Ford,1983)

Thediscourseof"mutualcombat"(Dobash,Dobash&Wilson,1992;Schwartz&Dekeseredy,1993;Straus,1993;)or"commoncoupleviolence"(Johnson,1995)shiftstheblame,orpartofit,tothevictimSuchdiscourseunderestimatestheimpactofthebatteringonwomenandtheirchildrenandignoresthedynamicsofbatteringrelationshipsinaddressingaspecificincident(Ferraro,1989b)Inlegalarenas,thereisatendencytoacceptwomen'sreluctancetoresorttolegalmeansasasignthatthedangernolongerexistsandthesituationis"undercontrol"(Ferraro,1989b;Lerman,1986)Batteredwomen'sreluctancetoprosecutehelpsabusersminimizevictiminjuryandpersuadelegalofficialsthatthebatteringintheparticularincidentdoesnotmeritseriousconsideration,orthatwomentooreadilymobilizethesystemdespitealackofseriousdangertothemselvesortheirchildren

RecentReformsinProsecutionandAdjudicationofDomesticViolence

Followingthe19thcenturylegalchangesthatredefinedwifeabuseasacrime,therewerefewchangesinstatelawsgoverningdomesticviolenceuntilthe1970sOverthepasttwodecades,however,legislatureshaveenactedmanyinnovativelawsandjudicialofficers(prosecutorsandcourts)thathavehelpedtoexpandthescopeandresponsibilitiesofcriminaljusticeagenciesindomesticviolence

Recentlegalinnovations,whichhaveaddressedreformswithintheprosecutionandadjudicationprocesses,includeconditionsunderwhichprotectionorderscanbeobtainedandrecognitionofspeciallegaldefensesforbatteredwomenwhohavekilledtheirpartners(Fagan,1996)Also,civilprotectionorders,atonetimeavailableonlypendingdivorce,wereextendedthroughlegislationtobatteredwomenwhowerenotindivorceproceedings(Hart,1991)Throughvariouspiecesoflegislation,attemptsweremadetoimproveprosecutionstrategiesandvictims,services,encouragingcollaborationbetweenvictimservicesandcriminaljusticeagencies(Burnett,etal,1976),aswellasevaluativeassistancefromresearchers

Theprosecutionofdomesticviolencecaseshasbeenthetargetofreforms,whichwereaimedatproducingmorechargingdecisions,andcourtsgeneratingmoreordersofprotectionThesereformswerebasedontherealizationthatmanymisdemeanorcasesdropoutofthecriminaljusticeprocessatvariouspoints,ascriminaljusticeofficialshavediscretionarypowersandusethemforlegalaswellasorganizationalconsiderationsSomereformsweretriggeredbysymbolicreasons;otherhadpracticaljustifications,suchaspresumeddeterrence,incapacitationorrehabilitationofbatterersButregardlessofthemotivationbehindthem,thereislittleevidencethattheyhavesignificantlyalteredpatternsofprosecutingandadjudicatingdomesticviolencecases

Prosecutors,likethepolice,historicallyhavetakenminimalactioninthefewcasesofdomesticviolencethathavecometotheirattention(Ford&Regoli,1993,Schmidt&Steury,1989)Thisdisregardtowardsdomesticviolencecaseshasresulted,however,fromapplicationoflegalconsiderations,suchasthestatutoryseriousnessoftheoffense,theoffender'spriorrecord,takingintoaccountwhetherweaponswereused,thepresenceofaninjury,ortheavailabilityofphysicalevidence(Rauma,1984;Schmidt&Steury,1989)Otherthaninjury,theseelementsorcasecharacteristicsarenotusuallypresentindomesticviolenceincidents,andtheirabsencereducesthelikelihoodofprosecution

Yet,thedebatesurroundingthemosteffectivewaystoimprovetheprosecutionofdomesticviolencecaseshasrevolvedaroundvictims'behavior,particularlytheirlackof"cooperation"Ithasbeendocumentedthatprosecutorsbelieveoranticipatethatvictimswillwithdraworrecanttheirallegations(Ellis,1984),andthisisoftenthereasonprosecutorshesitatetopursuesuchcasesThereisalsothebeliefthatvictimswhohaverecantedtheirallegationsorfailedto"cooperate"mayforfeittheirentitlementtothebenefitsofthelegalsystem(Stanko,1982)Theseviewsarebasedonthepresumptionthatacooperatingvictimisessentialtotheobjectiveofprosecution,whichinturnisbasedontheassumptionthattheaimoftheprosecutionisconviction

ThesetwoassumptionsarenotnecessarilydefensibleindomesticviolencecasesTheaimoftheprosecution,victimadvocatesargue,shouldbevictimsafety,whichthebatterer'slegalentanglementmayenhance(Worden,2000a)Prosecutioncanalsobeawaytosendamessagetotheperpetratorthatthebatteringisunacceptable,oritcanserveasameasuretoempowervictims,wherebythecriminaljusticesystemservesasanallyatthevictim'sdisposal(Ford,1991,Lerman,1981)Asthenextsectionsuggeststhesedescriptionsdonotcharacterizethemajorityofcasesthatcurrentlyareprosecutedbythecriminaljusticesystem

Policyattemptstosidesteptheperceiveddisinclinationofvictimstofollowthroughwiththeirdomesticviolencecomplaintsorovercomeearlywithdrawalfromproceedingsprimarilyincludedno-droppoliciesThesepoliciesaresupposedtoallowprosecutorstogoforwardwiththeprosecutionevenwhenvictimsdecidetowithdrawthecomplaintorfailtocooperatewiththeprosecutionProsecutorsbegantoexperimentwithno-droppoliciesinthe1980s(Ford&Regoli,1993),presumablytoreleasevictimsfromformalresponsibilitytopursuecases,orfromambivalenceaboutcooperatingwithchargesagainsttheirpartners

ThesepoliciesweremetwithbothenthusiasmaswellasdismaybyobserversSomehavearguedthattheeffectofthepolicy,ifnotitsintent,hasbeentolegitimizeprosecutors'earlyscreeningdecisionsbypre-selectingcomplainantswhoarecommittedtoprosecutionearlyintheprocessandprotectingprosecutors'investmentsincasedevelopmentatlaterstagesifthevictimattemptstowithdrawordoesnotfollowthroughAttheextreme,someprosecutorsmaintainthattheywouldsubpoenareluctantvictimstotestifytoensureconvictionoftheirbatterers(Worden,2000a)Researchevaluatingno-droppolicieshasbeensparse;theresearchthatexistsshowsthatno-droppolicieshavealimitedvalueinaccomplishingconvictionofbattererswhosevictimsdonotchoosetocooperate(Ford&Regoli,1993)Whilethismaybeabenefitinsomecasestovictims,itmayproducedisempowermentofvictimsinothercasesCriticismraisedagainsttheno-droppoliciesissimilartothatraisedagainstmandatoryarresttotheextentthatsuchpoliciesstripvictimsoftheiragency,autonomy,andfreedomtochoosetheircourseofaction

Prosecutorshaveundertakenotherstrategiestoincreasetheirabilitytoprosecutecrimeswithreluctantvictims,orthosewhowithdrawtheircomplaints,asisthecaseindomesticviolenceincidentsOnestrategyistheadoptionofvictimadvocacyprogramswithinprosecutors'offices,whichstreamlinecaseprocessingandmayincreasevictimretentioninthelegalprocessAnotherstrategyisevidence-basedprosecution,thepracticeofbuildingcaseswithoutrelyingonvictimtestimonyTheseapproachesholdpromiseastheytakepressureoffvictimsHowever,thesepolicieshavebeenviewedasintendedtoserveprosecutorialneedsratherthanvictims'objectives(Cahn&Lerman,1991),anditisnotclearwhetherprosecutorswillreceivetheresourcesorhavetheinclinationtoadoptsuchlabor-intensivestrategywithmisdemeanorcases(Worden,2000a),althoughtheymaybeanacceptedpracticeinfelonycases

The"batteredwomansyndrome"hasbeenemployedasalegaldefenseincasesinwhichabatteredwomanassaultedorkilledherabuser

LegaldefensesforBatteredWomen

The"batteredwomansyndrome"hasbeenanotherreformintroducedinjusticeproceedingsasawaytocorrectpastpracticesofignoringtheplightofthebatteredwomanindefendingherselfincourt,ortheneedtoapplystandardsoflaw,orlegaldefensessuchasselfdefense,thatwerenotsuitableforsituationsofbatteringThe"batteredwomansyndrome"hasbeenemployedasalegaldefenseincasesinwhichabatteredwomanassaultedorkilledherabuserOftentheseareincidentsinwhichawomanwhohasbeenabusedforaprolongedperiodoftime,andconsequentlyexperiencedwhathasbeentermed"murderbyinstallment"(Ewing,1987),hasreactedbyinjuringorkillingherabuserTheseareoftencasesinwhichabatteredwomanhadassaultedherabuserwithoutanyprovocation,butnonethelesshasbeenperceivedasdefendingherselfduetoherspecialpsychologicalstateofmindSuchawomanisoftenconsideredasbeinginimminentdangertoherselforherchildrenandthereforecanbenefitfromthisdefense,eventhoughshekilledwithoutprovocation,orassaultedherabuserwhiletheabusersleptorwasotherwiseoffguard(Gillepsie,1989)

ResearchFindingsonProsecutionandAdjudicationRelatedIssues

Thissectionwillreviewresearchonjudges'behaviororresponsestodomesticviolenceItwillalsoaddresstheroleofphysicalevidence,andprosecutionorders

Judges'BehaviororResponsestoDomesticViolence

Littleresearchhasbeenconductedonjudges'behaviorinthecourtroomortheiropportunitiestocommunicatewithoffendersinformallySomeresearchhassuggestedthatjudgesvaryinthemessagestheysendtodefendants,evenwithinthesamejurisdiction(Quarm&Schwartz,1985)Sternpublicmessagestodefendantsweremorehelpfultovictimsthansubtleclues;thelatterwereperceivedbyvictimsasnothelpful,conveyingamessagethatthattheydonothavethesupportofthecourt(Goolkasian,1986)

Studiesalsosuggeststhat"officersofthecourt"whoprocessdomesticincidentsareoftennotfamiliarwiththedynamicsofintimateviolence,noraretheyawareofvictims'reasonsformobilizingthesystem,filingchargesordroppingtheircomplaintsReminiscentofpastexperienceswiththeprosecutionofrapecases,attorneyswhoprosecuteanddefendbatterersaremoreconcernedwiththepossibilityofmanipulativewomenfalselyaccusing"innocent"menthanwithprotectingvictimsfromharmandabuse(Erez&King,2000)Defensestrategiesandtactics,andattorneys'self-appraisaloftheirsuccessincourt,suggestthatstereotypicalimagesofvictimsembodiedinthedefensesanddeeplyentrenchedinthecourtbeliefsystem,maystillguidethelegalsystem'sframeworkofaction(Erez&King,2000)

Itisachallengetochangeentrenchedbeliefsaboutdomesticviolence/womanbatteringheldbycourtofficials;andvariousStates'TaskForcesthroughouttheUSAhavelistedthistaskasaprimarygoalforenhancingcourtprocessesinvolvinggenderconcernsLesscomplexwaystoincreasetheprospectsofinitiatingprosecutionor"winning"acasearetoincreasethestrengthofthephysicalevidenceforprosecution

TheRoleofPhysicalEvidenceinDomesticViolence:MedicalReports

Recentresearchhasnotedtheimportanceofprecisemedicalreportingforstrengtheningcasesofdomesticviolence

Recentresearch(Isaac&Enos,2001)hasnotedtheimportanceofprecisemedicalreportingforstrengtheningcasesofdomesticviolenceThisresearchdemonstratesthatmedicalreportsthatarehighlydetailed,writtenlegibly,andstatethatthevictimisthesourceofthenarrativeaboutinjuriesandtrauma,orprovideexactquotes,arecriticalindecisionstolaunchcriminalcases(Isaac&Enos,2001)Medicalreportscanbemademuchmoreusefultodomesticviolencevictimsinlegalproceedingsifclinicianscandothefollowing:takephotographsofinjuriesknownorsuspectedtohaveresultedfromtheviolence;writelegibly,preferablywiththeuseofcomputers;setoffthepatient'sownwordswithquotationmarksandusesuchphrasesas"patientstates",or"patientsreports,"toindicatethattheinformationsourceisthevictimCliniciansarealsoadvisedtoavoidsuchphrasesas"patientclaims"or"patientalleges"whichimplydoubtaboutthepatient'sreliabilityIftheclinicianobservationsconflictwiththepatient'sstatements,theclinicianshouldrecordthereasonforthedifference

Cliniciansarealsoadvisedtousemedicaltermsandavoidlegalphrasessuchas"allegedperpetrator"or"assailant"or"assault"

Cliniciansarealsoadvisedtousemedicaltermsandavoidlegalphrasessuchas"allegedperpetrator"or"assailant"or"assault"Cliniciansareencouragedtoavoidsummarizingapatient'sreportinconclusiveorlegalterms(egpatientisabatteredwoman)Moreeffectivereportinginvolvesdescribingthepersonwhocausedtheinjurybyquotingthepatientasaccuratelyaspossible,describingthepatient'sdemeanor,suchascryingorshaking,andrecordingthetimeanddayofexamination,andifpossible,howmuchtimelapsedsincetheabuse(Isaac&Enos,2001)Consideringtheimportanceofphysicalevidenceindomesticviolencecases,adherencetothesesuggestionsmaysignificantlystrengthenthecasesandhelpintheirprosecution

ProtectionOrders:RecentResearchFindings

Researchhasmostcommonlyaddressedoneaspectofcourtprocessing,namelytheissuanceandenforcementofprotectionordersStudieshaveshownthatvictimsseekprotectioninthewakeofseriousthreatstothemselvesortheirchildren,orintheaftermathofactualabuse(Kaci,1992)particularlyiftheabusehaslastedforasustainedperiodoftime(Fischer&Rose,1995)VictimsseekprotectionordersforthesamereasonstheypursueprosecutionThedecisionisoftennotrelatedtothegravityoftheincidentprecedingtheviolencebutrathertovariouspracticalandsafetymatters,whichsuggeststhatvictimsarerationalandmotivatedindividualsseekingtoconstructbarriersagainstviolentpartners(Worden,2000a)Manyvictimsbelievethatprotectionorderswillhelptheminbeingsafe(Finn,1991),afactthathasledsometofearforvictimscultivatingafalsesenseofsafetyinjurisdictionswhereordersarenoteasytoenforce(Klein,1996;Zorza,1992)Researchhassuggestedthatprotectionordersarehelpfuliftheyarewrittenveryspecifically,arecomprehensiveintheirtermsandconditions,areeasytoobtain,andareintegratedintothevictims'accessofsocialandvictimservices(Keilitz,1994)

Researchhasshownthatvictimsoftencomplainaboutprotectionorderswhentheyareperceivedtonotprovideanymeasureofsafety,particularlywhentheirabusershaveahistoryofviolence,childrenwereinvolved,ortheoffenderhasbeenarrestedandresistedlegalproceedingsordeniedculpabilityduringcourthearing(Chaudhri&Daly,1996)ProtectiveorderswerealsonotassociatedwithahigherchanceofreceivingchildcustodyVictimsreportedthattheirabusersassaultedthemwhentheywerepresentedwithaprotectionorder;victimsalsoreportedthatlawenforcementagentsagreedthatprotectionordersdonotenhancevictims'safety(Erez&Belknap,1998a;1998b)

Itiscommonknowledgethatissuesofdomesticviolencearenoteasilycompartmentalized,andoftenthedivisionbetweencriminalandcivilremediesisillusoryorartificialForinstance,itisoftennecessarytoaddresswithinthesamecourtvariousissuesrelatedtopartnerabuse,suchascustody,visitationandprotectionorderstogetherwithissuesrelatedtovictimsafetyTherefore,amovementtoreplacecriminalandcivilcourtswithspecializeddomesticviolencecourtshasemerged;somejurisdictionshaveexperimentedwithsuchcourtsThereislittleevidence,however,toevaluatethewayinwhichthesecourtshaveperformedandwithwhatkindofresults(Worden,2000a)

Lastly,thesanctioningofbatterershasalsoreceivedresearchattention,withonlyafewstudiesassessingtheeffectivenessordeterrencevalueofsomeofthecommonpunitivemeasuresimposedonbatterers,suchasfinesorjailtime(Davis,Smith&Nickles,1998;Thistlewaite,Wooldredge&Gibbs,1998)Enormousefforts,however,havebeendirectedtowardsevaluatingbattererinterventionprograms'”themostcommonsanctionimposedonbatterers,ofteninadditiontofineorasaprobationcondition(Gregory&Erez,2002;Gondolf,1997,1999;Tolman&Edelson,1995)Theresearchevaluatingtheeffectivenessofbattererinterventionprogramsandothersanctionscommonlyimposedinbatteringcaseshasnotproducedanyconclusivefindingsontheeffectivenessofanyspecificsanctionoritsrelativeadvantagesascomparedtootheroptions

Theimportanceofacoordinatedcommunityresponsetoaneffectivewaytoaddressdomesticviolence,hasbeen,however,confirmedIntegratingcriminaljusticeandcommunitynetworksinrespondingtowomanbatteringmaybemoreproductiveinaddressingtheproblemthanactingseparatelyorwithoutnetworkingandcommunitycooperationVariousjurisdictionshaveexperimentedwithsuchcooperativeefforts,forexample,policedepartmentsjointogetherwithsheltersandhospitalstoaddressabuse,concludingthatintegrativeandcooperativeeffortsareefficientandeffectivewaystorespondtobatteredwomen,andtopulltogetherresourcesandexpertise(Worden,2000b)

SummaryandConclusion

Researchhasshownthatbyalmostanydefinitionofdomesticviolence,thiscrimeisacommonoccurrenceBecausephysicalviolencewithinfamiliesissoprevalent,andashistoricallysocietyhasplacedahighvalueonfamilyprivacyandmaleauthority,particularlywithintheconfinesofthefamilialunit,thecriminaljusticesystemforalongtimehasresistedcriminalizingactsoffamilyviolenceTheseviewsandattitudeshaveundergonerevisionsoverthelasttwodecades,andthefieldhaswitnessedincreasedunderstandingofthecausesofdomesticviolence,thebehaviorpatternsofabusers,andthereactionsoftheirvictimsYet,therearestillmanyquestionsleftunansweredaboutthewaystoconceptualizedomesticviolenceandestablishacceptableinterventionstrategies

ThecriminaljusticeresponsetowomanbatteringhasbeenamajorareaofconcernforbothactivistsandacademicsOverthelasttwodecades,manyjurisdictionsintheUSAhavetakenvariousstepstocombattheviolencethroughlegalmeans;theysuccessfullypassedlegislationmandatingthearrestofbatterers,introduced"no-drop"prosecutorialpolicies,andestablishedspecializeddomesticviolencecourtsUnderlyingtheselegalreformsisanassumptionthatimplementingpolicies,whichforcethepolicetoarrest,willhelpprosecutorspursuecasesandpreventfearfulvictimsfromdroppingthechargeSimilarly,creatingspecialcourtstodealcomprehensivelywithfamilyconflictwillenhancethesystem'sabilitytocombatwomanbattering

Thependulumhasswungfromallowingbatteringvictimsamajorroleincriminaljusticedecisionmakingtowardmandatingthestatetoinitiateitsowncourseofaction

Studiesevaluatingtheimpactoftheselegaleffortssuggestthatthereformshavehadonlyalimitedeffectontransformingthesystem'straditionalhandlingofwomanbatteringStereotypicalviewsofbatteredwomenandabusiverelationshipsheldbylawenforcementagentscontinuetounderlieattimespoliceandcourtpracticesConceptionsofwomanabuseas"familyviolence"andthemythofwomanbatteringas"mutualcombat"havecompromisedattemptstotreatbatteringcasesascrimesandprotectwomenfromviolentmenVictim-blamingattitudesoccasionallyheldbypolice,prosecutors,judgesandothercourtstaffinwomanbatteringcasesmaydistorttherealityofdomesticviolencedynamics,playdownthedangerposedtowomeninabusiverelationshipsandinhibitbatteredwomenfromutilizingthesystemCommoncourtpracticesemployedbydefenseattorneystodefendbatterers,suchasattackingtheveracityofthecomplaintandthecredibilityofthecomplainant,havemadeitdifficulttoconvictthefewbattererswhosecasesreachthecourtsWhentheproofofthedefendant'sguiltturnstothecredibilityofwitnesses,batteredwomenmaynotbeperceivedasconvincingiftheyaretootimidorfrightenedandthusunabletospeakorgiveacoherent,reliablynarratedtestimony

Recenttrendsinpolicyreformstoovercomethedifficultiesinrespondingtowomanbatteringincluderemovingarrestandprosecutiondecisionsfrombatteredwomen,increasingtheuseofrestrainingorders,andimplementingbatterertreatmentprogramsassanctionsThependulumhasswungfromallowingbatteringvictimsamajorroleincriminaljusticedecisionmakingtowardmandatingthestatetoinitiateitsowncourseofaction--beitarrestorprosecution--evenwithoutthevictims'consentorcooperation

Someoftheissuesagreeduponindesigningaresponsetodomesticviolenceunderscorearealizationthatthephenomenonoffamilyviolenceimplicatessocialstructuralfactorswhichcannotnecessarilybeaddressedthroughcriminaljusticeinterventions,thatattemptstorelyonlawenforcementalonetohandletheproblemarenotlikelytoproduceasustainedchangeinthebatterer'sbehavior,andthattheproblemneedstobeaddressedwithanintegratedcommunityapproachWithoutaddressingtheunderlyingcausesofdomesticviolence/womanbattering,itsrootsandantecedents,ameaningfulandsustainedchangeintheextentoftheproblemisnotlikelytooccur

PullingtogetherresourcesandcoordinatingeffortsmayimproveourresponsetodomesticviolenceIncludingeducational,religious,political,cultural,mediaorhealthprofessionalsorinstitutionsinacoordinatedresponsecanhelpinaddressingthispersistentsocialproblemTheAmericanpublic'sintuitiveconclusionthatlawenforcementalonecannotresolvetheproblem(Stalans,1996)isinfactcorrectFurther,thecriminaljusticeresponse,likeotherinstitutionalresponses,canbeeitherhelpfulorharmfultovictimsaswellastotheirbatterers(Erez&Belknap,1998)Awarenessofavailableresearchonthepotentialofeachresponsetohelporharmvictimsmayconstituteanothersteptowardtheeliminationofdomesticviolence

Author

EdnaErez,LLB,PhD
E-mail-eerez@kentedu

EdnaErez,LLB,PhD,hasalawdegreefromHebrewUniversityofJerusalemandaPhDinsociology/criminologyfromtheUniversityofPennsylvaniaShealsoconductedpostdoctoralstudiesincriminaljusticeevaluationresearchattheUniversityofSouthernCaliforniaDrErezhasbeenaresearchfellowattheMaxPlanckInstituteofInternationalandComparativeCriminallawinFreiburg,Germany,andattheAustralianInstituteofCriminologyinCanberra,AustraliaDrErezwastheChairoftheAmericanSocietyofCriminologyTaskForceonViolenceAgainstWomen,whichpresenteditsreporttoAttorneyGeneralJanetRenoin1995Herresearchinterestsincludesociologyoflaw,victimsofcrime,andwomenincrimeandjusticeHermostrecentresearchaddressesviolenceagainstimmigrantwomenandevaluationofinterventionprogramswithwomanbatterers

TrainingpoliceasspecialistsinfamilycrisisinterventionNCJ50Washington,DC:USDepartmentofJustice,LawEnforcementAssistanceAdministration

Belknap,J,&McCall,KD(1994)Womanbatteringandpolicereferrals(3),223-236

Belknap,J(1995)Lawenforcementofficers'attitudesabouttheappropriateresponsestowomanbatteringInternationalReviewofVictimology4,47-62

Binder,A,&Meeker,JW(1992)ImplicationsforthefailuretoreplicatetheMinneapolisexperimentalfindingsAmericanSociologicalReview58,886-888

Blackstone,W(1987)CommentariesontheLawsofEnglandStPaul,MN:West

Bowker,LH(1983)Batteredwives,lawyers,anddistrictattorneys:Anexaminationoflawinaction,,403-412

BowmanCG(1992)Thearrestexperiments:AfeministcritiqueJournalofCriminalJusticeLawandCriminology83(1),201-208

Browne,A(1987)WhenbatteredwomenkillBoston:NortheasternUniversity

Brown,SE(1984)Policeresponsestowifebeating:NeglectofacrimeofviolenceJournalofCriminalJustice12,277-88

Buel,SM(1988)MandatoryarrestfordomesticviolenceHarvardWomen'sLawJournal11,213-226

BurnettB,Carr,JJ,Sinapi,J,&Taylor,R(1976)PoliceandsocialworkersincommunityoutreachprogramSocialCasework,41-49

Buzawa,E,&Buzawa,C(1996)Domesticviolence:ThecriminaljusticeresponseThousandOaks,CA:Sage

Cahn,NR,&Lerman,LG(1991)ProsecutingwomenabuseInMSteinman(Ed),Womanbattering:Policyresponses(pp95-112)Cincinnati:AndersonPublishing

Campbell,A(1993)Men,Women,andAggressionNewYork:BasicBooks

Campbell,R(1995)Theroleofworkexperienceandindividualbeliefsinpoliceofficers'perceptionsofdaterape:AnintegrationofquantitativeandqualitativemethodsAmericanJournalofCommunityPsychology23,249-277

Cannavale,F(1976)WitnesscooperationNewYork:Lexington

Chaudhri,M,&Daly,K(1996)Dorestrainingordershelp?InESBuzawa,&CBuzawa(Eds),Domesticviolence:Thecriminaljusticeresponse(2nded)ThousandOaks,CA:Sage

Davis,EG(1971)TheFirstSexNewYork:Putnam

DavisRC,Smith,BE,&Nickles,LB(1998)ThedeterrenteffectofprosecutingdomesticviolencemisdemeanorsCrime&Delinquency44(3),434-442

Dobash,RE,&Dobash,R(1979)ViolenceagainstwivesNewYork:FreePress

DobashRE,&Dobash,R(1992)ViolenceagainstwomenandsocialchangeLondon,NewYork:Routledge

Dobash,RE,Dobash,R,Cavanagh,K,&Lewis,R(1998)Separateandintersectingrealities:Acomparisonofmen'sandwomen'saccountofviolenceagainstwomenViolenceAgainstWomen4(4),382-414

DobashRE,Dobash,R&Wilson,M(1992)ThemythofsexualsymmetryinmaritalviolenceSocialProblems,,71-91

EllisJE(1984)Prosecutorialdiscretiontochargeincasesofspousalassault:AdialogueJournalofCriminalLawandCriminology75(1),56-102

Erez,E(forthcoming)Migration/Immigration,womanbatteringandthejusticesystemInternationalJournalofComparativeandAppliedCriminalJustice(specialissueonmigration,cultureconflictandcrime)

Erez,E(2000a)IntegratingavictimperspectivewithincriminaljusticeInA

Crawford,&JGoodey(Eds),Integratingavictimperspectivewithincriminaljustice(pp165-184)Aldershot,England:Ashgate

Erez,E(2000b)Immigration,cultureconflictanddomesticviolence/womanbatteringCrimePreventionandCommunitySafety:AnInternationalJournal2(2),17-21

Erez,E(1986)Intimacy,violence,andthepoliceHumanRelations39(3),265-281

Erez,E,&Belknap,J(1995)PolicingdomesticviolenceInWBailey(Ed),EncyclopediaofPoliceScience(2nded)NewYork:GarlandPublications

Erez,E,&Belknap,J(1998a)Intheirownwords:Batteredwomen'sassessmentofthecriminalprocessingsystem'sresponsesViolenceandVictims13(3),251-268

Erez,E,&Belknap,J(1998b)Batteredwomenandthecriminaljusticesystem:TheperspectivesofserviceprovidersEuropeanJournalofCriminalPolicyandResearch6,37-87

Erez,E&Kessler,D(1997)Theprosecutionandadjudicationofdomesticviolencecases:AnevaluationstudyAreportsubmittedtotheOfficeofCriminalJusticeServices,StateofOhio,Columbus,OH

Erez,E,&King,T(2000)Patriarchalterrorismorcommoncoupleviolence:Attorneys'viewsofprosecutinganddefendingwomanbatterersInternationalReviewofVictimology,(1-3),207-226

Ewing,CP(1987)BatteredwomenwhokillNewYork:Lexington

Fagan,J1996ContributionsofresearchtocriminaljusticepolicyonwifeassaultInDDJBesharov(Ed),Familyviolence:ResearchandpublicpolicyissuesWashington,DC:AmericanEnterpriseInstitutePress

Ferraro,KJ(1989a)PolicingwomanbatteringSocialProblems36(1),61-74

Ferraro,KJ(1989b)ThelegalresponsetowomanbatteringintheUnitedStatesInJHanmer,JRadford,&EAStanko(Eds)Women,policingandmaleviolenceLondon:RoutledgeandKegan

Finn,P(1991)Civilprotectionorders:AflawedopportunityforinterventionInMSteinman(Ed),Womanbattering:PolicyresponsesCincinnati:AndersonPublishing

Fischer,K,&Rose,M(1995)When"enoughisenough":Batteredwomen'sdecisionmakingaroundcourtordersofprotectionCrime&Delinquency41(4),414-429

Ford,DA(1983)Wifebatteryandcriminaljustice:Astudyofvictimdecision-makingFamilyRelation32,463-475

Ford,DA(1991)Prosecutionasavictimpowersource:AnoteonempoweringwomenintheirviolentconjugalrelationshipsLaw&SocietyReview25(2),313-334

Ford,DA,&Burke,MJ(1987)Victiminitiatedcriminalcomplaintsforwifebattery:AnassessmentofmotivesPaperpresentedattheThirdNationalConferenceforFamilyViolenceResearchers,Durham,NewHampshire

Ford,DA,&Regoli,MJ(1992)ThepreventativeimpactsofpoliciesforprosecutingwifebatterersInESBuzawa,&CGBuzawa,Domesticviolence:Thechangingcriminaljusticeresponse(pp181-207)Westport,CT:AuburnHouse

Ford,DA,&Regoli,MJ(1993)TheIndianapolisdomesticviolenceprosecutionexperiment:Finalreport,NUGrantNo86-IJ-CX-0012Indianapolis:IndianaUniversity;andWashington,DC:USDepartmentofJustice,NationalInstituteofJustice,andUSDepartmentofHealthandHumanServices,NationalInstituteofMentalHealth

Frisch,LA(1992)Researchthatsucceeds,policiesthatfailJournalofCriminalLawandCriminology83(1),209-216

Gillepsie,CK(1989)Justifiablehomicide:Batteredwomen,selfdefenseandthelawColumbus,OH:OhioUniversityPress

Gondolf,EW(1997)Battererprograms:WhatweknowandneedtoknowJournalofInterpersonalViolence12(1),83-98

Gondolf,EW(1999)Acomparisonoffourbattererinterventionsystems:Docourtreferral,programlength,andservicesmatter?JournalofInterpersonalViolence14,41-61

Goolkasian,G(1986a)Confrontingdomesticviolence:Aguideforcriminaljusticeagencies-Issuesandpractices,NCJ101680Washington,DC:USDepartmentofJustice,NationalInstituteofJustice

Goolkasian,G(1986b)Confrontingdomesticviolence:Theroleofcriminalcourtjudges-Researchinbrief,NCJ102833Washington,DC:USDepartmentofJustice,NationalInstituteofJustice

Hamberger,LK(1997)Femaleoffendersindomesticviolence:AlookatactionsintheircontextJournalofAggression,MaltreatmentandTrauma1),117-129

Hart,BJ(1991)BatteredwomenandthecriminaljusticesystemInEBuzawa,&CBuzawa(Eds)Doarrestsandrestrainingorderswork?ThousandOaks,CA:Sage

Hart,B(1993)BatteredwomenandthecriminaljusticesystemAmericanBehavioralScientist36(5),624-638

Hirschel,JD,HutchinsonIII,IW,&Dean,CW(1992)ThefailureofarresttodeterspouseabuseJournalofResearchinCrimeandDelinquency29(1),7-33

Isaac,NE&Enos,VP(2001)Documentingdomesticviolence:Howhealthcareproviderscanhelpvictims-ResearchinbriefWashingtonDC:NationalInstituteofJusticeUSDepartmentofJustice

Johnson,IM,Sigler,RT,&Crowley,JE(1994)Domesticviolence:AcomparativestudyofperceptionsandattitudestowarddomesticabusecasesamongsocialserviceandcriminaljusticeprofessionalsJournalofCriminalJustice22(3),237-248

Johnson,MP(1995)Patriarchalterrorismandcommoncoupleviolence:TwoformsofviolenceagainstwomenJournalofMarriageandtheFamily,283-294

Kaci,JH(1992)AstudyofprotectiveordersissuedunderCalifornia'sDomesticViolencePreventionActCriminalJusticeReview17(1),61-76

Keilitz,S(1994)Civilprotectionorders:AviablejusticesystemtoolfordeterringdomesticviolenceViolenceandVictims9(1),79-84

Klein,AR(1996)Re-Abuseinapopulationofcourt-restrainedmalebatterers:Whyrestrainingordersdon'tworkInESBuzawa,&CBuzawa(Eds),Doarrestsandrestrainingorderswork?ThousandOaks,CA:Sage

Kurz,D(1993)Socialscienceperspectivesonwifeabuse:CurrentdebatesandfuturedirectionsInPBart&EMorgan,ViolenceAgainstWomentheBloodyFootprints(pp252-269)NewburyPark,CA:Sage

Langan,PA,&Innes,CA(1986)PreventingviolenceagainstwomenSpecialReport,NCJ102037Washington,DC:USDepartmentofJustice,BureauofJusticeStatistics

Langley,R&Levy,RC(1977)WifeBeatingTheSilentCrisisNewYork:Dutton

Langley,R&Levy,RC(1978)WifeAbuseandthepoliceresponseFBILawEnforcementBulletin47(May1978)

Lerman,LG(1981)Prosecutionforspouseabuse:InnovationsincriminaljusticeresponseWashington,DC:CenterforWomenPolicyStudies

Lerman,L(1986)ProsecutionofDomesticViolenceAgainstWomenSpecialReportWashington,DC:BureauofJusticeStatistics

Lerman,LG(1992)ThedecontextualizationofdomesticviolenceJournalofCriminalLawandCriminology83(1),217-240

Loseke,DR1991Changingtheboundariesofcrime:Thebatteredwomen'ssocialmovementandthedefinitionofwifeabuseascriminalactivityCriminalJusticeReview16(2),249-262

Mahoney,MR(1991)Legalimagesofbatteredwomen:RedefiningtheissueofseparationMichiganLawReview90,1-94

Martin,D(1976)BatteredWivesSanFrancisco:Glide

Martin,ME(1997)Doubleyourtrouble:DualarrestinfamilyviolenceJournalofFamilyViolence12(2),139-157

Maxwell,CDGarner,JH,&Fagan,JA(2001)Theeffectsofarrestonintimatepartnerviolence:Newevidencefromthespouseassaultreplicationprogramseries-ResearchinbriefWashingtonDC:NationalInstituteofJustice

McLeod,M(1983)Victimnon-cooperationintheprosecutionofdomesticviolenceassault:AresearchnoteCriminology21(3),395-416

Oppenlander,N(1982)Copingorcopingout?,449-465

Pagelow,M(1997)Batteredwomen:AhistoricalresearchreviewandsomecommonmythsJournalofAggression,MaltreatmentandTrauma97-116

Pence,E(1983)TheDuluthdomesticabuseinterventionprojectHamlineLawReview6,247-275

Pleck,E(1987)Domestictyranny:ThemakingofAmericansocialpolicyagainstfamilyviolencefromcolonialtimestothepresentNewYork:OxfordUniversityPress

Quarm,D,&Schwartz,M(1985)Domesticviolenceincriminalcourt:AnexaminationofnewlegislationinOhioWomenandPolitics4(3),29-46

Rauma,D(1984)Goingforthegold:Prosecutorialdecision-makingincasesofwifeassaultSocialScienceResearch13(4),321-351

Rowe,K(1985)Thelimitsoftheneighborhoodjusticecenter:WhydomesticviolencecasesshouldnotbemediatedEmoryLawJournal34,855-910

Ryan,RM(1996)Thesexright:AlegalhistoryofthemaritalrapeexemptionLawandSocialInquiry20(4),941-1004

Saunders,DG(1995)PredictionofwifeassaultInJCampbell(Ed),Assessingdangerousness:Violencebysexualoffenders,batterers,andchildabusers,Vol8ofInterpersonalviolence:Thepractice(pp68-95)ThousandOaks,CA:Sage

Schechter,S(1982)TowardananalysisofviolenceagainstwomeninthefamilyInSSchechter(Ed),Womenandmaleviolence(pp209-240)Boston:SouthEndPress

Schmidt,J,&Steury,EH(1989)ProsecutorialdiscretionintitlingchargesindomesticviolencecasesCriminology27,487-510

Schwartz,M,&Dekeseredy,W(1993)ThereturnofthebatteredhusbandsyndromethroughtypificationofwomenasviolentCrime,LawandSocialChange15,51-72

Sherman,L(1984)ThespecificdeterrenteffectsofarrestfordomesticassaultAmericanSociologicalReview49(2),261-272

Sherman,L(1992)PolicingDomesticViolenceNewYork:FreePress

Sigler,RT(1989)DomesticviolenceincontextLexington,MA:DCHeath

Singer,SI(1988)ThefearofreprisalandthefailureofvictimstoreportapersonalcrimeJournalofQuantitativeCriminology4,289-302

Stalans,LJ(1996)Familyharmonyorindividualprotection?PublicrecommendationsabouthowpolicecanhandledomesticviolencesituationsAmericanBehavioralScientist39,433-448

Stanko,EA(1982)Wouldyoubelievethiswoman?Prosecutorialscreeningfor"credible"witnessesandaproblemofjusticeInNRafter,&EStanko(Eds),Judge,la11ryet;victim,thiefwomen,genderroles,andcriminaljustice(pp63-82)Boston:NortheasternUniversityPress

Stanko,EA(1995)Policingdomesticviolence:ParadoxesanddilemmasAustralianandNewZealandJournalofCriminology(specialaddendum)

Straus,MA(1980)Behindcloseddoors:ViolenceinAmericanfamiliesGardenCity,NY:Anchor

Straus,MA(1993)IdentifyingoffendersincriminaljusticeresearchondomesticassaultAmericanBehavioralScientist36(5),587-600

Straus,MA,&Gelles,RJ(1990)PhysicalviolenceinAmericanfamilies:RiskfactorsandadaptationstoviolenceinfamiliesNewBrunswick,NJ:TransactionPublishers

Thistlewaite,A,Wooldredge,J,&Gibbs,D(1998)SeverityofdispositionsanddomesticviolencerecidivismCrime&Delinquency44(3),388-398

Tolman,RM,&Edleson,JL(1995)InterventionformenwhobatterAresearchreviewInSMStith,&MAStraus,Understandingpartnerviolence:Prevalence,causes,consequences,andsolutionsMinneapolis:NationalCouncilonFamilyRelations

Tong,R(1984)Women,SexandLawTotowa,NJ:Romwan&Allanheld

Walker,L(979)TheBatteredWomanNewYork:Harper&Row

Worden,PA(2000a)Thechangingboundariesofthecriminaljusticesystem:RedefiningtheproblemandtheresponseindomesticviolenceInCMFriel,CriminalJustice2000(Vol2)BoundaryChangesinCriminalJusticeOrganizations(pp215-266)WashingtonDC:NationalInstituteofJustice

Worden,PA(2000b)ModelsofcommunitycoordinationinpartnerviolencecasesFinalreport(draft),GrantNoNIJ95-WT-NX-0006Washington,DC:USDepartmentofJustice,NationalInstituteofJustice

Zoomer,O(1989)PolicingwomanbeatingintheNetherlandsInJHanmer,JRadford,&EAStanko(Eds),Women,policingandmaleviolence(pp125-154)London:Routledge&Kegan

Zorza,J(1992)Thecriminallawofmisdemeanordomesticviolence,1970-1990JournalofCriminalLawandCriminology83(1),46-72

©2002OnlineJournalofIssuesinNursing
ArticlepublishedJanuary31,2002

January 31, 2002

DOI: 10.3912/OJIN.Vol7No01Man03

https://doi.org/10.3912/OJIN.Vol7No01Man03

Share

Citation: Erez, Edna, (January 31, 2002). "Domestic Violence and the Criminal Justice System: An Overview" Online Journal of Issues in Nursing. Vol. 7 No. 1, Manuscript 3.

Related Articles