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