Domestic violence court

Last updated

Specialized domestic violence courts are designed to improve victim safety and enhance defendant accountability. There is no one set definition of a specialized violence court, although these types of courts can be either civil or criminal and typically hear the majority of an area's domestic violence cases on a separate calendar. Additionally, these courts are typically led by specially assigned judges who can make more informed and consistent decisions based on their expertise and experience with the unique legal and personal issues in domestic violence cases. [1]

Contents

Specialized domestic violence courts emerged as a problem-solving court in the 1980s and 1990s as a result of challenges and reforms to the criminal-legal system's approach to domestic violence such as Thurman v. City of Torrington. [2] This reform led to changes in police and prosecutor's handling of domestic violence cases, and specialized domestic violence courts were created to address the larger number of domestic violence cases as the criminal-legal system began to take domestic violence more seriously. [2]

While there are a variety of benefits associated with specialized domestic violence courts, there are concerns that specialized domestic violence courts do not support survivors or address the broader societal causes of domestic violence.

Background on domestic violence

The purple ribbon is used to encourage awareness of the problem of domestic violence Purple ribbon.svg
The purple ribbon is used to encourage awareness of the problem of domestic violence

The FBI estimates that a domestic violence crime is committed at a rate of once every fifteen seconds. [3] According to conservative estimates, one million women are battered by an intimate partner annually. [4] These numbers and the efforts of domestic violence advocates have led, over the last 20 years, to changes in the criminal justice response to such offenses. Prior to the 1960s and 1970s, domestic violence was viewed in the United States as a personal issue to be dealt with in private, rather than through the courts. However, activists in the battered women's movement and anti-rape movement raised awareness of domestic violence as an issue, not just within relationships, but within society more broadly. Activists in these movements initially relied on grassroots work to support survivors and promote change, but some activists turned to more institutionalized methods of change such as legislation and mainstream social services. [5] Some of the greatest institutional changes as a result of this activism occurred in the 1990s, with the passage of the federal Violence Against Women Act in 1994 and the creation of the first specialized domestic violence court in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania in 1991. [6] However, some criticize this institutional strategy for relying on the criminal-legal system, which is not meant to promote survivor autonomy. [7]

This increased attention to domestic violence resulted in, among other things, the passage of mandatory arrest laws, an increase in funding for services for victims, and the creation of special domestic violence prosecution and police units. [8] At the same time, there was a parallel movement taking place within state court systems as judges and attorneys began to search for new tools, strategies, and new technologies that could help them address difficult cases where social, human, and legal problems collide. [9]

New York's chief judge, Judith S. Kaye, with co-author Judge Susan Knipps, articulated the thinking behind the development of domestic violence courts in an essay published in Western State University Law Review: [4]

One possible judicial response to the current situation is to continue to process domestic violence cases as any other kind of case, and to continue to observe systemic failures. Another response, however—the problem solving response—is to try to design court programs that explicitly take into account the special characteristics that domestic violence cases present. If domestic violence defendants present a particular risk of future violence, then why not enhance monitoring efforts to deter such actions? If victims remain in abusive situations due to fear for their own and their children’s well being, then why not provide links to services and safety planning that may expand the choices available to them? If cases are slipping between the cracks of a fragmented criminal justice system, then why not work together to improve coordination and consistency?

Today, there are nearly 300 courts nationwide that have special processing mechanisms for domestic violence cases. [10] Three sites were the subject of a study by the Vera Institute of Justice: Milwaukee County, Wisconsin; Washtenaw County, Michigan; and Dorchester District in Boston, Massachusetts. Starting in 1999, judges and attorneys, advocates for women and batterer intervention specialists, probation officers, police, and others in those jurisdictions banded together in an ambitious effort to improve criminal justice and community responses to domestic violence. The three sites were selected to participate in the Judicial Oversight Demonstration Initiative—a national demonstration project funded by the U.S. Department of Justice's Office on Violence Against Women—have spent the past five years working to enhance victim safety and the oversight of offenders in their communities. [11]

The Center for Court Innovation is funded by the Office on Violence Against Women to provide technical assistance to courts interested in developing or enhancing their domestic violence programs. The Center for Court Innovation also has a grant from the National Institute of Justice to document the number and types of domestic violence courts in the United States.

Benefits

Justice system practitioners, victim advocates, and researchers [12] have cited the following major benefits of domestic violence courts:

Concerns

Susan Keilitz notes a number of concerns about domestic violence courts. The need for judges to specialize, for instance, may lead to a loss of neutrality among judges or “the assignment of judges who are not motivated to acquire the knowledge and skills required to be effective in these cases, or to loss of judicial effectiveness from the stress of fast-paced decisionmaking in difficult and emotionally charged cases every day.” Another concern is that greater efficiency in prosecution may lead to “assembly-line justice that ignores the special needs of victims,” Keilitz wrote. [15]

 Additionally, there are concerns that specialized domestic violence courts exclude and further harm multiply marginalized survivors. When examined through the lens of structural intersectionality, scholars such as Alesha Durfee argue that despite seeming neutral, the policies and procedures in specialized domestic violence courts are actually designed for “White, middle-class, cis, heterosexual, passive wom[en] who [are] not system-involved and [have] experienced documented physical abuse.” [16] There are concerns that specialized domestic violence courts, like other large institutions, replicate inequalities through mismatches between the assumptions embedded in law and policy about survivors and the lived experiences and oppressions faced by multiple marginalized survivors.

There are also concerns that specialized domestic violence courts exclude and further harm multiply marginalized survivors through carceral feminism. Scholars such as Deer and Barefoot argue that because of the history of state violence at the hands of the police and criminal justice system against marginalized communities, reliance on the criminal justice system through specialized domestic violence courts perpetuates broader inequalities. From Deer and Barefoot's perspective, “an increase in arrest rates and law enforcement involvement has not led to a decrease in sexual assault and instead leads to more violence,” especially against poor women of color and sexual minorities. [17]

In New York

In New York, the typical domestic violence court features a single presiding judge, a fixed prosecutorial team, and enhanced staffing to monitor defendant compliance and provide assistance to victims. [18] In order to ensure compliance with court orders, New York's first domestic violence court, the Brooklyn Felony Domestic Violence Court, launched in 1996, instituted a procedure that required parolees to come back to the court for a formal review of the terms of their order of protection. [19] There are now over 35 domestic violence courts in New York, including courts in the Bronx, Queens and Westchester Counties, the city of Buffalo, and smaller cities like Clarkstown and Binghamton. [20] An impact evaluation of 24 New York domestic violence courts found reduced re-arrests among convicted offenders. [21] New York State has also created integrated domestic violence courts where a single judge handles criminal domestic violence cases and related family issues, such as custody, visitation, civil protection orders and matrimonial actions. In addition, the New York court system has three Youthful Offender Domestic Violence Courts that work with teenage defendants. [22]

Sources

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Restraining order</span> Legal order prohibiting certain entities from specified actions

A restraining order or protective order, is an order used by a court to protect a person in a situation often involving alleged domestic violence, child abuse, assault, harassment, stalking, or sexual assault.

Battered woman syndrome (BWS) is a psychological trauma that results from ongoing physical, psychological, and/or sexual abuse, typically at the hands of an intimate partner. This syndrome is one of a group of conditions known as Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) and can lead to symptoms of depression, anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and even physical health problems. BWS can also result in the development of a “survival personality”, in which the person acts out of fear and attempts to avoid further harm. The symptoms of BWS are often divided into three categories: physical, psychological, and behavioral. Physically, victims of BWS may display signs of physical injury or illness, such as bruises, broken bones, or chronic fatigue. Psychologically, they may experience depression, anxiety, low self-esteem, and feelings of helplessness, guilt, and fear. Behaviorally, victims may exhibit a range of behaviors, including self-isolation, suicidal thoughts, and substance abuse. It is important to recognize that the effects of BWS may vary from person to person. Treatment for BWS typically includes individual and group therapy, as well as support from family and friends. Treatment may focus on helping the victim to develop healthy coping mechanisms, identify triggers for abusive behavior, and build self-esteem. In addition, it is important to ensure that the victim has access to safe housing and other resources, such as legal aid and counseling. Battered woman syndrome (BWS) is a pattern of signs and symptoms displayed by a woman who has suffered persistent intimate partner violence: whether psychological, physical, or sexual, from her male partner. It is classified in the ICD-9 (code 995.81) as battered person syndrome, but is not in the DSM-5. It may be diagnosed as a subcategory of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Violence Against Women Act</span> United States crime legislation

The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA) is a United States federal law signed by President Bill Clinton on September 13, 1994. The Act provided $1.6 billion toward investigation and prosecution of violent crimes against women, imposed automatic and mandatory restitution on those convicted, and allowed civil redress when prosecutors chose to not prosecute cases. The Act also established the Office on Violence Against Women within the U.S. Department of Justice.

The extremely controversial Duluth Model is a response to a subset of intimate partner violence that brings agencies together in a Coordinated Community Response to end domestic violence against women at the expense of male victims, it was later severely criticized by its creator, feminist Ellen Pence. It is named after Duluth, Minnesota, the city where it was developed., by the Domestic Abuse Intervention Project (DAIP)

Mental health courts link offenders who would ordinarily be prison-bound to long-term community-based treatment. They rely on mental health assessments, individualized treatment plans, and ongoing judicial monitoring to address both the mental health needs of offenders and public safety concerns of communities. Like other problem-solving courts such as drug courts, domestic violence courts, and community courts, mental health courts seek to address the underlying problems that contribute to criminal behavior.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Tahirih Justice Center</span> American non-governmental organization

The Tahirih Justice Center, or Tahirih, is a national charitable non-governmental organization headquartered in Falls Church, Virginia, United States, that aims to protect immigrant women and girls fleeing gender-based violence and persecution. Tahirih's holistic model combines free legal services and social services case management with public policy advocacy, training and education.

The Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment (MDVE) evaluated the effectiveness of various police responses to domestic violence calls in Minneapolis, Minnesota. This experiment was implemented during 1981-82 by Lawrence W. Sherman, Director of Research at the Police Foundation, and by the Minneapolis Police Department with funding support from the National Institute of Justice. Among a pool of domestic violence offenders for whom there was probable cause to make an arrest, the study design called for officers to randomly select one third of the offenders for arrest, one third would be counseled and one third would be separated from their domestic partner.

Domestic violence in Chile is a prevalent problem as of 2004. Domestic violence describes violence by an intimate partner or other family members, regardless of the place the violence occurs.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Domestic violence</span> Abuse of members of the same household

Domestic violence is violence or other abuse that occurs in a domestic setting, such as in a marriage or cohabitation. Domestic violence is often used as a synonym for intimate partner violence, which is committed by one of the people in an intimate relationship against the other person, and can take place in relationships or between former spouses or partners. In its broadest sense, domestic violence also involves violence against children, parents, or the elderly. It can assume multiple forms, including physical, verbal, emotional, economic, religious, reproductive, financial abuse, or sexual abuse. It can range from subtle, coercive forms to marital rape and other violent physical abuse, such as choking, beating, female genital mutilation, and acid throwing that may result in disfigurement or death, and includes the use of technology to harass, control, monitor, stalk or hack. Domestic murder includes stoning, bride burning, honor killing, and dowry death, which sometimes involves non-cohabitating family members. In 2015, the United Kingdom's Home Office widened the definition of domestic violence to include coercive control.

Ellen Louise Pence was an American scholar and a social activist. She co-founded the Duluth Domestic Abuse Intervention Project, an inter-agency collaboration model used in all 50 states in the U.S. and over 17 countries. A leader in both the battered women's movement and the emerging field of institutional ethnography, she was the recipient of numerous awards including the Society for the Study of Social Problems Dorothy E. Smith Scholar Activist Award (2008) for significant contributions in a career of activist research.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eugene Michael Hyman</span> American judge

Eugene Michael Hyman is an American retired judge, lawyer, and former police officer.

Victims' rights are legal rights afforded to victims of crime. These may include the right to restitution, the right to a victims' advocate, the right not to be excluded from criminal justice proceedings, and the right to speak at criminal justice proceedings.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Domestic violence in the United States</span>

Domestic violence in United States is a form of violence that occurs within a domestic relationship. Although domestic violence often occurs between partners in the context of an intimate relationship, it may also describe other household violence, such as violence against a child, by a child against a parent or violence between siblings in the same household. It is recognized as an important social problem by governmental and non-governmental agencies, and various Violence Against Women Acts have been passed by the US Congress in an attempt to stem this tide.

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to domestic violence:

Problem-solving courts (PSC) address the underlying problems that contribute to criminal behavior and are a current trend in the legal system of the United States. In 1989, a judge in Miami began to take a hands-on approach to drug addicts, ordering them into treatment, rather than perpetuating the revolving door of court and prison. The result was creation of drug court, a diversion program. That same concept began to be applied to difficult situations where legal, social and human problems mesh. There were over 2,800 problem-solving courts in 2008, intended to provide a method of resolving the problem in order to reduce recidivism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Management of domestic violence</span>

The management of domestic violence deals with the treatment of victims of domestic violence and preventing repetitions of such violence. The response to domestic violence in Western countries is typically a combined effort between law enforcement, social services, and health care. The role of each has evolved as domestic violence has been brought more into public view.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Julie Daniels</span> American politician

Julie Daniels is an American politician who has served in the Oklahoma Senate from the 29th district since 2016.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Carceral feminism</span> Forms of feminism that advocate for increased prison sentences

Carceral feminism is a critical term for types of feminism that advocate for enhancing and increasing prison sentences that deal with feminist and gender issues. The term criticises the belief that harsher and longer prison sentences will help work towards solving these issues. The phrase "carceral feminism" was coined by Elizabeth Bernstein, a feminist sociologist, in her 2007 article, "The Sexual Politics of the 'New Abolitionism'". Examining the contemporary anti-trafficking movement in the United States, Bernstein introduced the term to describe a type of feminist activism which casts all forms of sexual labor as sex trafficking. She sees this as a retrograde step, suggesting it erodes the rights of women in the sex industry, and takes the focus off other important feminist issues, and expands the neoliberal agenda.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Toni Hasenbeck</span> American politician

Toni Hasenbeck is an American politician who has served in the Oklahoma House of Representatives from the 65th district since 2018.

April Rose Wilkens is an American woman serving a life sentence at Mabel Bassett Correctional Center after her conviction for the murder of Terry Carlton and the subject of the podcast series Panic Button: The April Wilkens Case. She was one of the first women to use battered woman syndrome in an Oklahoma trial, and claimed to have acted in self defense, but it did not work in her favor and she was still found guilty by a jury. Local Tulsa news stations still to this day are hesitant to cover her case due to Carlton's family owning and operating dealerships which buy ad time from them. Her case caused an "outcry from those who say she acted because of battered woman syndrome." As of 2022, she was going into her 25th year of incarceration.

References

  1. ↑ B., Cissner, Amanda. Testing the effects of New York's domestic violence courts : a statewide impact evaluation. OCLC   856583820.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  2. 1 2 "Domestic Violence Courts", Encyclopedia of Psychology and Law, 2455 Teller Road, Thousand Oaks California 91320 United States: SAGE Publications, Inc., 2008, doi:10.4135/9781412959537.n91, ISBN   9781412951890 , retrieved 2023-02-27{{citation}}: CS1 maint: location (link)
  3. ↑ N.Y. STATE OFFICE FOR THE PREVENTION OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE, DOMESTIC VIOLENCE DATA SHEET (2001).
  4. 1 2 Judith S. Kaye and Susan K. Knipps, Judicial Responses to Domestic Violence: The Case for a Problem Solving Approach, 27 W. ST. U.L. REV. 3 (1999-2000).
  5. ↑ Arnold, Gretchen (2017-05-10). McCammon, Holly J.; Taylor, Verta; Reger, Jo; Einwohner, Rachel L. (eds.). "U.S. Women's Movements to End Violence against Women, Domestic Abuse, and Rape". Oxford Handbooks Online. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190204204.013.15.
  6. ↑ Buzawa, Eve S.; Buzawa, Carl G., eds. (2017). Global Responses to Domestic Violence. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-56721-1. ISBN   978-3-319-56719-8.
  7. ↑ BAILEY, KIMBERLY D. (2010). "Lost in Translation: Domestic Violence, "The Personal is Political," and the Criminal Justice System". The Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology. 100 (4): 1255–1300. ISSN   0091-4169. JSTOR   25766125.
  8. ↑ Maytal, Anat (2008). "Specialized Domestic Violence Courts: Are They Worth the trouble in Massachusetts?" (PDF). Boston University Public Interest Law Journal. 18 (197).
  9. ↑ For more on how courts have responded to domestic violence, see "BRIDGING THEORY AND PRACTICE: A ROUNDTABLE ON COURT RESPONSES TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE" (PDF). Journal of Court Innovation.
  10. ↑ "Specialization of Domestic Violence Case Management in the Courts: A National Survey" (PDF). National Institute of Justice.
  11. ↑ "ENHANCING RESPONSES TO DOMESTIC VIOLENCE PROMISING PRACTICES FROM THE JUDICIAL OVERSIGHT DEMONSTRATION INITIATIVE" (PDF). Vera Institute of Justice. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2007-10-04.
  12. ↑ See Fritzler, R.B., and Simon, L.M.J. (2000). “Creating a Domestic Violence Court: Combat in the Trenches.” Court Review, 37, 28–39; Karan, A., Keilitz, S., and Denaro, S. (1999). “Domestic Violence Courts: What Are They and How Should We Manage Them?” Juvenile and Family Court Journal, 50, 75–86; Keilitz, S., Jones, A., and Rubio, D. (2000). Specialization of Domestic Violence Case Management in the Courts: Findings From a National Survey. Williamsburg, VA: National Center for State Courts; Tsai, B. (2000). “The Trend Toward Specialized Domestic Violence Courts: Improvements on an Effective Innovation.” Fordham Law Review, 68, 1285–1327; and Winick, B. (2000). “Applying the Law Therapeutically in Domestic Violence Cases.” University of Missouri–Kansas City Law Review, 69, 1–63.
  13. ↑ Maytal, Anat (2008). "Specialized Domestic Violence Courts: Are They Worth the Trouble in Massachusetts?" (PDF). Boston University Public Interest Law Journal. 18 (197): 197–219.
  14. ↑ Kulkarni, Shanti (2018-09-17). "Intersectional Trauma-Informed Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) Services: Narrowing the Gap between IPV Service Delivery and Survivor Needs". Journal of Family Violence. 34 (1): 55–64. doi: 10.1007/s10896-018-0001-5 . ISSN   0885-7482. S2CID   52290249.
  15. ↑ "Specialization of Domestic Violence Case Management in the Courts: A National Survey" (PDF). National Institute of Justice.
  16. ↑ Durfee, Alesha (2020-09-23). "The Use of Structural Intersectionality as a Method to Analyze How the Domestic Violence Civil Protective Order Process Replicates Inequality". Violence Against Women. 27 (5): 639–665. doi:10.1177/1077801220958495. ISSN   1077-8012. PMID   32965175. S2CID   221864448.
  17. ↑ Deer, Sarah; Barefoot, Abigail (2019). "The Limits of the State: Feminist Perspectives on Carceral Logic, Restorative Justice, and Sexual Violence". Kansas Journal of Law and Public Policy. 28 (3): 505–527.
  18. ↑ "What Makes a Domestic Violence Court Work? Lessons from New York" (PDF). American Bar Association’s Judges’ Journal.
  19. ↑ "Specialized Felony Domestic Violence Courts: Lessons on Implementation and Impact from the Kings County Experience" (PDF). Urban Institute.
  20. ↑ "Planning a Domestic Violence Court: The New York State Experience" (PDF). Center for Court Innovation.
  21. ↑ "Testing the Effects of New York's Domestic Violence Courts" (PDF). Center for Court Innovation.
  22. ↑ "Process Evaluation of the Brooklyn Youthful Offender Domestic Violence Court" (PDF). Center for Court Innovation.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.