This article is about domestic violence specifically in the United States. For the main article, see domestic violence.
Victims of Domestic Violence marker, Courthouse Square, Quincy, Florida
Domestic violence 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. In the United States, 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.
Many scholarly studies of the problem have stated that domestic violence is often part of a dynamic of control and oppression in relationships, regularly involving multiple forms of physical and non-physical abuse taking place concurrently. Intimate terrorism is an ongoing, complicated use of control, power and abuse in which one person tries to assert systematic control over another psychologically. Homeless shelters exist in many states as well as special hotlines for people to call for immediate assistance, with non-profit agencies trying to fight the stigma that people face in reporting these issues.
Definitions
According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary definition, domestic violence is: "the inflicting of physical injury by one family or household member on another; also: a repeated or habitual pattern of such behavior."[6]
The following definition applies for the purposes of subchapter III of chapter 136 of title 42 of the US Code:
The term 'domestic violence' includes felony or misdemeanor crimes of violence committed by a current or former spouse of the victim, by a person with whom the victim shares a child in common, by a person who is cohabitating with or has cohabitated with the victim as a spouse, by a person similarly situated to a spouse of the victim under the domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction receiving grant monies, or by any other person against an adult or youth victim who is protected from that person's acts under the domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction.[7]
It also applies for the purposes of section 7275 of subpart 17 of Part D of subchapter V of chapter 70 of title 20,[9] section 1437F of subchapter I of chapter 8 of title 42,[10] and subchapter XII-H of chapter 46 of title 42 of the US Code.[11]
Situational couple violence, which arises out of conflicts that escalate to arguments and then to violence, is not connected to a general pattern of control, generally infrequent, and likely the most common type of intimate partner violence. Women are as likely as men to be abusers, however, women are somewhat more likely to be physically injured, but are also more likely to successfully find police intervention.[14]:3
Intimate terrorism (IT), involves a pattern of ongoing control using emotional, physical and other forms of domestic violence and is what generally leads victims. It is what was traditionally the definition of domestic violence and is generally illustrated with the "Power and Control Wheel"[15] to illustrate the different and inter-related forms of abuse.[14]:2–4
Violent resistance (VR), or "self-defense", is violence perpetrated by victims against their abusive partners.[16]
Mutual violent control (MVC) is a rare type of intimate partner violence that occurs when both partners act in a violent manner, battling for control.[18]
Incidence
Between 960,000 and 3,000,000 incidents of domestic violence are reported each year, while many other incidents go unreported.[19] It is estimated that more than ten million people experience domestic violence in the U.S. each year.[20]
The ten states with the highest rate of females murdered by males were, as of 2010, Nevada, South Carolina, Tennessee, Louisiana, Virginia, Texas, New Mexico, Hawaii, Arizona, Georgia.[21] In 2009, for homicides in which the victim to offender relationship could be identified, 93% of female victims were murdered by a male they knew, 63% of them in the context of an intimate relationship.[22]
Several studies in the U.S. have found that domestic violence is more common in the families of police officers than in the general population. Early studies found that between 24% and 40% of participating families of police officers reported incidents of domestic violence.[23][24] Subsequent studies suggested possible rates of officer-involved domestic violence that ranged from 4.8% to 28%,[25][26] meaning the rate could be the same as that of the general public.[25] The prevalence of domestic violence in law enforcement is important, as police attitudes toward domestic violence affect the quality of police intervention in domestic violence situations.[27][28][29]
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in 2022 individuals identifying as women and men reported intimate partner violence around 41% and 26%, respectively, in the United States.[30] The National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) indicates that in 1998 about 876,340 violent crimes were committed in the U.S. against women by their current or former spouses, or boyfriends.[31] According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, in the United States 41% of women and 26% of men experience intimate partner violence in their lifetime, under "contact sexual violence, physical violence, and/or stalking".[32]
Research reviews have concluded that women's physical violence against men is more likely to be caused by self-defense and/or retaliation.[33][34] A 2010 systematic review of the literature on women's perpetration of IPV found that anger, self-defense and retaliation were common motivations but that distinguishing between self-defense and retaliation was difficult.[34]
With regard to similar rates and a difference in methods, a study compiled by Martin S. Fiebert, suggested that women are as likely to be violent to men, but that men are less likely to be hurt. He, however, stated that men are seriously injured in 38 percent of the cases in which "extreme aggression" is used. Fiebert additionally stated that his work was not meant to minimize the serious effects of men who abuse women.[35][36][nb 1] A 2011 review by researcher Chan Ko Ling from the University of Hong Kong found that perpetration of minor partner violence was equal for both men and women but more severe partner violence was far likelier to be perpetrated by men.[37] His analysis found that men were more likely to beat up, choke or strangle their partners while women were more likely to throw objects, slap, kick, bite, punch, or hit with an object.[37] The Bureau of Justice Statistics also reported that women are far more likely to use objects.[38] The National Institute of Justice contends that national surveys supported by NIJ, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Bureau of Justice Statistics that examine more serious assaults do not support the conclusion of similar rates of male and female spousal assaults. These surveys are conducted within a safety or crime context and find more partner abuse by men against women.[39][nb 2]
Straus and Gelles found that in couples reporting spousal violence, 27 percent of the time the man struck the first blow; in 24 percent of cases, the woman initiated the violence. The rest of the time, the violence was mutual, with both partners brawling. The results were the same even when the most severe episodes of violence were analyzed. In order to counteract claims that the reporting data was skewed, female-only surveys were conducted, asking females to self-report, and the data was the same.[40] The simple tally of physical acts is typically found to be similar in those studies that examine both directions, but studies show that male violence is more serious. Male violence does more damage than female violence;[41] women are more likely to be injured and/or hospitalized. Women are more likely to be killed by an intimate than the reverse (according to the Department of Justice, the rate is 63.7% to 36.3%),[42] and women in general are more likely to be killed by their spouses than by all other types of assailants combined.[43]
Studies have found that men are much less likely to report victimization in these situations.[44] According to some studies, less than 1% of domestic violence cases are reported to the police.[45][46] In the United States 10–35% of the population will be physically aggressive towards a partner at some point in their lives.[35][47][48] As abuse becomes more severe women become increasingly overrepresented as victims.[47] The National Violence Against Women Survey for 2000 reported that 25% of women and 7.6% of men reported being victims of intimate partner violence at some point in their lives.[49] The rate of intimate partner violence in the U.S. declined from 1993 until 2014, after which the number of women killed by an intimate partner began to rise while the number of men killed by an intimate partner continued to decline.[50][51]
In a 2006 Amnesty International report, The Maze of Injustice: The Failure to Protect Indigenous Women From Sexual Violence in the USA,[52] the data for Native women indicates high levels of sexual violence. Statistics gathered by the U.S. government reveal that Native American and Alaska Native women are more than 2.5 times more likely to be sexual assaulted than women in the United States in general;[53] more than one in three Native women will be raped in their lifetime.[54]
Statistics
Over the past few decades
In 1995–96, a UN national study found that 1% of all women participants (over 18, with or without partners or spouses) had been victims of domestic abuse within the previous 12-month period. Since this population included women who had never been partnered, the prevalence of domestic violence may have been greater among partnered women.[55]
In 2000, a report by the United States Department of Justice found that 1.3% of women and 0.9% of men reported experiencing domestic violence in the past year.[1]
About 2.3 million people are raped or physically assaulted each year by a current or former intimate partner or spouse.[56]
Physically assaulted women receive an average of 6.9 physical assaults by the same partner per year.[56]
In 2019, a study found that the number of women murdered by an intimate partner had increased to an average of almost 4 a day. It reflected a gradual rise in the figures since 2014 after a steady reduction over the previous 40 years.[51]
Female victimization rates may vary by race or ethnicity, as white women and black women were more likely to be victims of beatings than were Asian or Hispanic women, according to a 2012 study.[57]
The United States was one of the countries identified by a United Nations study with a high rate of domestic violence resulting in death during pregnancy [citation needed].
During one's lifetime
According to The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and The National Institute of Justice, nearly 25% of women experience at least one physical assault during adulthood by a partner.[56]
22% of the women had been subject to domestic violence during some period of their life, according to a United Nations study. Since this population included women who had never been married or partnered, the prevalence of domestic violence may have been greater.[55]
According to a report by the United States Department of Justice in 2000, a survey of 16,000 Americans showed 22.1 percent of women and 7.4 percent of men reported being physically assaulted by a current or former spouse, cohabiting partner, boyfriend or girlfriend, or date in their lifetime.[1]
60% of American Indian and Alaska Native women will be physically assaulted in their lifetime.[56]
A 2013 report by the American Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) found that 26% of male homosexuals and 44% of lesbians surveyed reported experiencing intimate partner violence. The study evaluated 2010 data from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey, which involved over 16,000 U.S. adults.[4]
Injury
In 1992, domestic violence was the leading cause of injury for women between 15 and 44; more than rapes, muggings, and car accidents combined.[58] The levels of domestic injury against men have not been investigated to the same extent.
1 in 71 men and 1 in 5 women have experienced an attempted or completed rape (with 1 in 21 men being made to penetrate someone). More than one in three American Indian and Alaska Native women will be raped in their lifetimes.[56][59]
A 2013 CDC study stated that 28% of straight women who had been raped experienced their first rape as a child, with the crime taking place between the ages of 11 and 17.[4]
Murder
Comparative rates of homicides involving family members between 1980 and 2008. Killing by a spouse or ex-spouse exceeds the rate of all other categories. In proportion to the total number of family homicides, killing by spouses and ex-spouses fell from 52% to 37% during this period. Meanwhile, murder of the children went up 57%.
Women are more likely than men to be murdered by an intimate partner. Of those killed by an intimate partner, about three quarters are female and about a quarter are male. In 1999 in the United States, 1,218 women and 424 men were killed by an intimate partner,[61] and 1,181 females and 329 males were killed by their intimate partners in 2005.[62][63] In 2007, 2,340 deaths were caused by intimate partner violence—making up 14% of all homicides. 70% of these deaths were females and 30% were males.[64]
In the United States, firearms have played a role in domestic violence. Compared to other nations, the United States is the number one country for owning guns in the world.[65] According to the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV), there has been a rise of 500% of death when a firearm is present during domestic violence.[66]
Dating violence is often a precursor to domestic violence. 22% of high school girls and 32% of college women experienced dating violence in a 2000 study. 20.6% of women experienced two or more types of dating violence and 8.3% of women experienced rape, stalking or physical aggression while dating.[67] The levels of dating violence against men has not been investigated to the same extent.
Stalking
According to the Centers for Disease Control National Intimate Partner Violence Survey results of 2010, 1 in 6 women (15.2%) have been stalked during their lifetime, compared to 1 in 19 men (5.7%).[68] Additionally, 1 in 3 bisexual women (37%) and 1 in 6 heterosexual women (16%) have experienced stalking victimization in their lifetime during which they felt very fearful or believed that they or someone close to them would be harmed or killed.[69]
Socio-economic impacts
While domestic violence crosses all socio-economic classes, Intimate Terrorism (IT) is more prevalent among poor people. When evaluating situational couple violence, poor people, subject to greater strains, have the highest percentage of situational couple violence, which does not necessarily involve serious violence.[14]:4
Regarding ethnicity, socio-economic standing and other factors often have more to do with rates of domestic violence. When comparing the African American population to European Americans by socio-economic class, the rates of domestic violence are roughly the same. Since there are more poor African Americans, though, there is a higher incidence of domestic violence overall. It is not possible to evaluate the rate of domestic violence by ethnicity alone, because of the variability of cultural, economic and historical influences and the forms of domestic violence (situational couple violence, intimate terrorism) affecting each population of people.[14]:4
Effects on children
Up to 10 to 20% children in the United States witness abuse of a parent or caregiver annually. As a result, they are more likely to experience neglect or abuse, less likely to succeed at school, have poor problem-solving skills, subject to higher incidence of emotional and behavioral problems, and more likely to tolerate violence in their adult relationships.[70] In the wake of domestic violence, parental psychopathology can further compromise the quality of parenting, and in turn, increase the risk for the child's developing emotional and behavioral difficulties if mental health care is not sought.[71]
According to the authors of "Housing Problems and Domestic Violence," 38% of domestic violence victims will become homeless in their lifetime.[72][56] Domestic violence is the direct cause of homelessness for over half of all homeless women in the United States.[73] According to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, domestic violence is the third leading cause of homelessness among families.[74]
Economic impacts
Economic abuse can occur across all socio-economic levels.[75]
25% - 50% of victims of abuse from a partner have lost their job due to domestic violence.
35% - 56% of victims of domestic violence are harassed at work by their partners.
More than 1.75 million workdays are lost each year to domestic violence. Lost productivity due to missed workdays and decreased productivity, with increased health and safety costs, results in a loss of $3 to $5 billion each year.[76]
The Centers for Disease Control has released that the medical care, mental health services, and lost productivity cost of intimate partner violence was an estimated $8.3 billion in 2003 dollars for women alone.[77]
One 2004 study by William Bradford Wilcox examined the relationship between religious affiliation, church attendance, and domestic violence, using data on wives' reports of spousal violence from three national United States surveys conducted between 1992 and 1994.[78] The study found that the lowest reported rates of domestic violence occurred among active conservative Protestants (2.8% of husbands committed domestic violence), followed by those who were religiously unaffiliated (3.2%), nominal mainline Protestants (3.9%), active mainline Protestants (5.4%), and nominal conservative Protestants (7.2%).[78]
Overall (including both nominal and active members), the rates among conservative Protestants and mainline Protestants were 4.8% and 4.3%, respectively.[78] Examining Wilcox's study, Van Leewen finds that the parenting style of conservative Protestant fathers is characterized by features which have been linked to positive outcomes among children and adolescents,[nb 3][79] that there is no evidence that gender-traditionalist ideology of the "soft patriarchal" kind is a strong predictor of domestic physical abuse,[nb 4][79] and that "gender hierarchicalist males" who are frequent and active church members function positively in the domestic environment. [nb 5][79]
Another 2007 study by Christopher G. Ellison suggested that "religious involvement, specifically church attendance, protects against domestic violence, and this protective effect is stronger for African American men and women and for Hispanic men, groups that, for a variety of reasons, experience elevated risk for this type of violence."[80]
History
Prior to the mid-1800s, most legal systems implicitly accepted wife beating as a valid exercise of a husband's authority over his wife.[81][82] One exception, however, was the 1641 Body of Liberties of the Massachusetts Bay colonists, which declared that a married woman should be "free from bodilie correction or stripes by her husband."[83]
Political agitation during the 19th century led to changes in both popular opinion and legislation regarding domestic violence within the United Kingdom and the United States.[84][85] In 1850, Tennessee became the first state in the United States to explicitly outlaw wife beating.[86][87] Other states soon followed suit.[82][88]
In 1878, the Matrimonial Causes Act made it possible for women in the UK to seek separations from abusive husbands.[89] By the end of the 1870s, most courts in the United States were uniformly opposed to the right of husbands to physically discipline their wives.[90] By the early 20th century, it was common for the police to intervene in cases of domestic violence in the United States, but arrests remained rare.[91] Wife beating was made illegal in all states of the United States by 1920.[92][93]
Modern attention to domestic violence began in the women's movement of the 1970s, particularly within feminism and women's rights, as concern about wives being beaten by their husbands gained attention. The first known use of the expression "domestic violence" in a modern context, meaning "spouse abuse, violence in the home" was in 1973.[94][95] With the rise of the men's movement of the 1990s, the problem of domestic violence against men has also gained significant attention.
The Thurman lawsuit (Thurman v. City of Torrington, DC, 595 F.Supp. 1521 (1985)) brought about sweeping national reform of domestic violence laws, including the "Thurman Law" (aka the Family Violence Prevention and Response Act) instituted in Connecticut in 1986, making domestic violence an automatically arrestable offense, even if the victim does not wish to press charges.[96]
Attention to violence against men began in the late 1980s.
Recent legal scholarship argues that the traditional narrative surrounding domestic violence, that judges ignored or shielded wife beaters behind the veil of marital privacy, is questionable.[101] Rather, judges would routinely intervene on behalf of battered women in order to protect victims and reinforce gender norms by punishing men for "failing to conform to appropriate husbandly behavior."[101] On the other hand, women accused of beating their husbands were not punished as severely and were even sometimes applauded by judges for "disciplining" their husbands.[101]
Law
Victims of domestic violence are offered legal remedies that are both civil and criminal in nature.
Criminal law remedies include the criminal prosecution of the offender, and possible restraints on the offender's behavior during periods of pretrial release or as part of a criminal sentence.
Civil law remedies include the possibility of obtaining a protection order.
These remedies are not exclusive, meaning that a victim may seek both the criminal prosecution of the offender and also petition for civil remedies.[102]
People who perpetrate acts of domestic violence are subject to criminal prosecution. Prosecution most often occurs under assault and battery laws. Perpetrators of domestic violence can be charged under general statutes,[103][104][105] but most states have also enacted specific statutes that specifically criminalize acts of domestic violence. For example, under the South Carolina code, the crime of "Criminal domestic violence" states that "it is unlawful to: (1) cause physical harm or injury to a person's own household member; or (2) offer or attempt to cause physical harm or injury to a person's own household member with apparent present ability under circumstances reasonably creating fear of imminent peril." If aggravated circumstances are present, people can be charged with the crime of "Criminal domestic violence of a high and aggravated nature."
Other possible criminal charges may be brought based upon the facts of the offense, potentially including charges such as harassment, menacing or false imprisonment.
Acts of domestic violence can have a significant impact on Child custody laws in the United States litigation, most notably when an act of domestic violence is committed in the presence of the minor child. A parent with a history of domestic violence may be at a significant disadvantage in a custody case, even if the domestic violence was not directed at the other parent.
Certain laws indirectly impact domestic abuse survivors. A study commissioned by the ACLU of two cities in New York found that local nuisance ordinances, which penalize tenants and property owners based on criminal or police activity on a property, may have the unintended consequence of victims of domestic abuse being evicted and/or deterred from reporting abuse.[106] In a study of four cities in Cuyahoga County, Ohio found survivors of domestic violence were disproportionately likely to receive a nuisance notification.[107]
The lockdowns that were part of the 2020 coronavirus response may have indirectly contributed to an increase in domestic violence. Domestic violence calls to police within New York state, for example, increased by 15–20% in March 2020.[108]
Violence Against Women Acts
October is observed as Domestic Violence Awareness Month (DVAM) in the United States. This poster was issued by various branches of the United States military to educate and prevent domestic abuse.
The Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) was originally passed in 1994, and reauthorized in 2005, 2013, and 2022. These federal laws work to end domestic violence, sexual assault, dating violence, and stalking through the creation of new programs and legislation within the Department of Justice and Health and Human Services. Along with the passage of provisions to legislation, the Office on Violence Against Women came to fruition in 1995 under the Department of Justice of the United States to continue efforts that would protect women. The primary role of the division was to evaluate and improve outcomes for domestic violence survivors through tackling related issues like housing insecurity.[109] One of the contributions of the OVAW was the introduction of federal grants to incentivize agencies to help women in need.[109] The VAWA intensified investigations and prosecutions of individuals involved in domestic abuse cases and it decreased the number of occurrences. The law helped victim advocates and government agencies work together, created prevention and victim support programs, and resulted in new punishments for certain violent crimes, which by 2005 resulted in:
49.8% reduction of non-fatal, violent victimizations committed by intimate partners.
In the first six years, an estimated $14.8 billion in net averted social costs.
51% increase in reporting of domestic violence and 18% increase in National Domestic Violence Hotline calls each year, evidence that as victims become aware of remedies, they break the code of silence.[56][110]
In 2022 VAWA funding was reauthorized to include the Ensuring Forensic Health Care for all Act (EFCA) to fund support for generalist forensic nurse training.[111]
Also in 2022, VAWA was amended to include Native Hawaiian survivors of gender-based violence and Native Hawaiian organizations in grant funding.[112]
In the 2024 U.S. Supreme Court case United States v. Rahimi, the U.S. Supreme Court, in an 8-1 ruling, upheld VAWA’s domestic violence restraining order which restricts firearm possession for people convicted of domestic abuse.[113]
The Family Violence Prevention and Services Act (FVPSA), first authorized as part of the Child Abuse Amendments of 1984 (PL 98–457), provides federal funding to help victims of domestic violence and their dependent children by providing shelter and related help, offering violence prevention programs, and improving how service agencies work together in communities.
Formula Grants. This money helps states, territories, and tribes create and support programs that work to help victims and prevent family violence. The amount of money is determined by a formula based partly on population. The states, territories, and tribes distribute the money to thousands of domestic violence shelters and programs.
The 24-hour, confidential, toll-free National Domestic Violence Hotline provides support, information, referrals, safety planning, and crisis intervention in more than 170 languages to hundreds of thousands of domestic violence victims each year.
The Domestic Violence Prevention Enhancement and Leadership Through Alliances (DELTA) Program teaches people ways to prevent violence.[110]
Domestic Violence Prevention Enhancement and Leadership Through Alliances (DELTA)
The DELTA program, funded by Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), works towards preventing Intimate Partner Violence (IPV) in certain funded communities. The way that the DELTA program works towards prevention is by understanding factors that influence violence and then focusing on how to prevent these factors. This is done by using a social ecological model which illustrates the connection between Individual, Relationship, Community, and Societal factors that influence violence.[114]
This law has been tested but supported in federal court with the case United States v. Emerson (No. 99-10331) (5th Cir. 2001).[118] See also U.S. v. Emerson, 231 Fed. Appx. 349 (5th Cir. 2007) (Same defendant seeking review of judgment). The case involved a challenge to the Constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8)(C)(ii), a federal statute that prohibited the transportation of firearms or ammunition in interstate commerce by persons subject to a court order that, by its explicit terms, prohibits the use of physical force against an intimate partner or child. Emerson does not address the portion of the Lautenberg Amendment involving conviction for misdemeanor domestic violence. It was initially overturned in 1999 for being unconstitutional, but that case was reversed upon appeal in 2001.[119]
The case Gillespie v. City of Indianapolis, Indiana, 185 F.3d 693 (7th Cir. 1999) also challenged this law, and the case was rejected.[120] The ex post facto aspects of the law were challenged with:
United States v. Brady, 26 F.3d 282 (2nd Cir.), cert. denied, 115 S.Ct. 246 (1994) (denying ex post facto challenge to a 922(g)(1) conviction) and
United States v. Waters, 23 F.3d 29 (2nd Cir. 1994) (ex post facto based challenge to a 922(g)(4) conviction).
Both of the challenges were denied.
Likewise this law was invoked in United States v. Jardee[121] where it was ruled that the threat of being subjected to the gun ban did not turn an otherwise "petty" crime into a "serious" one requiring a jury trial.
In United States vs Chovan (2013), the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled that the Lautenberg amendment is constitutional. Chovan claimed that his civil rights had been restored due to California law, but according to federal law, his rights had never been restored. The court also stated that a person cannot have their civil rights restored if they were never taken away in the first place since the Lautenberg amendment does not take away a person’s right to vote or be on a jury.[122]
In United States v. Hayes (2009), the Supreme Court held that the predicate offense does not need to include a domestic relationship as an element, so long as a domestic relationship did in fact exist between the perpetrator and the victim. United States v. Castleman (2014) challenged the application of the law to misdemeanor convictions which did not involve "the use or attempted use of physical force". In a 9–0 decision, the United States Supreme Court held that Castleman's conviction of "misdemeanor domestic assault" did qualify as a "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence" under Tennessee state law. Specifically holding that the ""physical force" requirement is satisfied by the degree of force that supports a common-law battery conviction — namely, offensive touching", thereby preventing him from possession of firearms.[123] Most recently, the Supreme Court in Voisine v. United States, 579 U.S. ___ (2016), decided that the Domestic Violence Offender Gun Ban in U.S. federal law extends to those convicted of recklessdomestic violence.[124][125][126]
Bipartisan Safer Communities Act
The Bipartisan Safer Communities Act was signed into law on June 25, 2022.[127] This federal legislation significantly narrows the boyfriend loophole, denying access to firearms for five years to people convicted of violence in dating relationships. However, this restriction does not apply to those who only have restraining orders.[128]
Federal probation and supervised release for domestic violence offenders
The United States federal probation and supervised release law:
Requires first-time domestic violence offenders convicted of domestic violence crimes to attend court-approved non-profit offender rehabilitation programs within a 50-mile radius of the individual's legal residence.
Makes probation mandatory for first-time domestic violence offenders not sentenced to a term of imprisonment.[129]
Asylum for victims of domestic violence
In 2014 the Board of Immigration Appeals, America's highest immigration court, found for the first time that women who are victims of severe domestic violence in their home countries can be eligible for asylum in the United States.[130] However, this ruling was in the case of a woman from Guatemala and thus applies only to women from Guatemala.[130]
Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales (2005)
Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales is a 2005 United States Supreme Court case in which the Court ruled, 7–2, that a town and its police department could not be sued under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for failing to enforce a restraining order, which had led to the murders of a woman's three children by her estranged husband.[131] However, regarding this case, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights found that the United States "failed to act with due diligence" to protect Jessica and her daughters Leslie, Katheryn, and Rebecca Gonzales from domestic violence, "which violated the state's obligation not to discriminate and to provide for equal protection before the law."[132] The Commission further held that "the failure of the United States to adequately organize its state structure to protect [Leslie, Katheryn, and Rebecca] from domestic violence was discriminatory and constituted a violation of their right to life."[132]
Domestic violence protective orders related to bans on possessing a firearm became enacted by the 1968 Gun Control Act.[137][113] However, the federal law which enforced the restraining order in question was the 1994 Violence Against Women Act.[113]
On June 21, 2024, the Supreme Court ruled 8–1 with the government, upholding the ability to temporarily restrict individuals deemed to be a physical threat from gun possession which was granted through the 1994 law.[138][139][140]
State law
California
In California, depending on the circumstances of the case and the perpetrator's criminal record, the crime of domestic violence may be charged as either a felony or a misdemeanor.
If the victim's injuries are minor, such as bruises or scratches, and the perpetrator has no prior record, then the perpetrator will likely be charged with a misdemeanor, under California Penal Code, Sec. 243(e)(1).[141]
If the injuries are serious, or it is deemed that there was "great bodily injury" as defined by state law, or if the perpetrator has a prior criminal record, then it will more likely be charged as a felony under California Penal Code, Sec. 273.5, Corporal Injury on a Spouse or Cohabitant.[142]
Connecticut
The Thurman lawsuit (Thurman v. City of Torrington, DC, 595 F.Supp. 1521 (1985)) brought about sweeping national reform of domestic violence laws, including the "Thurman Law" (aka the Family Violence Prevention and Response Act) instituted in Connecticut in 1986, making domestic violence an automatically arrestable offense, even if the victim does not wish to press charges.[96]
Weiand v. State was a landmark Florida Supreme Court case that took place in March 1999. In this historic case, the state's Supreme Court granted Florida citizens the ability to rely upon battered spouse syndrome as a defense in killing their abuser.[145] While the decision is effective for anyone who is in an abusive situation, the majority of people that would take advantage of this defense are women since they are generally abused more than men.[146] In this notable instance of an attempted defense using battered spouse syndrome, referred to as battered woman syndrome, Florida resident Kathleen Weiand shot and killed her husband Todd Weiand. She used the battered woman syndrome in her defense and the defense expert agreed that she was suffering from the syndrome. However, the jury rejected her defense and Kathleen was sentenced to 18 years in prison for second degree murder. Kathleen appealed, eventually reaching Florida's Supreme Court who regarded her case as high priority. Ultimately, the Court overturned the ruling, in favor of Kathleen Weiand.[147]
In the 1970s, it was widely believed that domestic disturbance calls were the most dangerous type for responding officers, who arrive to a highly emotionally charged situation. This belief was based on FBI statistics which turned out to be flawed, in that they grouped all types of disturbances together with domestic disturbances, such as brawls at a bar. Subsequent statistics and analysis have shown this belief to be false.[153][154]
Statistics on incidents of domestic violence, published in the late 1970s, helped raise public awareness of the problem and increase activism.[155][156] A study published in 1976 by the Police Foundation found that the police had intervened at least once in the previous two years in 85% of spouse homicides.[157] In the late 1970s and early 1980s, feminists and battered women's advocacy groups were calling on police to take domestic violence more seriously and change intervention strategies.[158] In some instances, these groups took legal action against police departments, including Los Angeles's, Oakland, California's and New York City's, to get them to make arrests in domestic violence cases.[159] They claimed that police assigned low priority to domestic disturbance calls.[160]
The Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment was a study done in 1981–1982, led by Lawrence W. Sherman, to evaluate the effectiveness of various police responses to domestic violence calls in Minneapolis, Minnesota, including sending the abuser away for eight hours, giving advice and mediation for disputes, and making an arrest. Arrest was found to be the most effective police response. The study found that arrest reduced the rate by half of re-offending against the same victim within the following six months.[161] The results of the study received a great deal of attention from the news media, including The New York Times and prime-time news coverage on television.[162]
Many U.S. police departments responded to the study, adopting a mandatory arrest policy for spousal violence cases with probable cause.[163] By 2005, 23 states and the District of Columbia had enacted mandatory arrest for domestic assault, without warrant, given that the officer has probable cause and regardless of whether or not the officer witnessed the crime.[164] The Minneapolis study also influenced policy in other countries, including New Zealand, which adopted a pro-arrest policy for domestic violence cases.[165]
However, the study was subject of much criticism, with concerns about its methodology, as well as its conclusions.[162] The Minneapolis study was replicated in several other cities, beginning in 1986, with some of these studies having different results; one of which being the fact that the deterrent effect observed in the Minneapolis experiment was largely localized.[166] In the replication studies which were far more broad and methodologically sound in both size and scope, arrest seemed to help in the short run in certain cases, but those arrested experienced double the rate of violence over the course of one year.[166]
Each agency and jurisdiction within the United States has its own Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) when it comes to responding and handling domestic calls. Generally, it has been accepted that if the understood victim has visible (and recent) marks of abuse, the suspect is arrested and charged with the appropriate crime. However, that is a guideline and not a rule. Like any other call, domestic abuse lies in a gray area. Law enforcement officers have several things to consider when making a warrantless arrest:
Are there signs of physical abuse?
Were there witnesses?
Is it recent?
Was the victim assaulted by the alleged suspect?
Who is the primary aggressor?
Could the victim be lying?
Could the suspect be lying?
Along with protecting the victim, law enforcement officers have to ensure that the alleged abusers' rights are not violated. Many times in cases of mutual combatants, it is departmental policy that both parties be arrested and the court system can establish truth at a later date. In some areas of the nation, this mutual combatant philosophy is being replaced by the primary abuser philosophy in which case if both parties have physical injuries, the law enforcement officer determines who the primary aggressor is and only arrests that one. This philosophy started gaining momentum when different government/private agencies started researching the effects. It was found that when both parties are arrested, it had an adverse effect on the victim, leading to decreased faith in law enforcement. As a result some 22 US states now have primary aggressor laws.[167] A study of incidents in which both parties were arrested found that such cases were more likely to involve unmarried white women and drugs and alcohol.[168]
State due diligence
International law requires that States exercise due diligence to reduce domestic violence and, when violations occur, to provide effective investigation and redress to victims.[169] In 2011, Rashida Manjoo, the United NationsSpecial Rapporteur on Violence Against Women, urged the United States to "[e]xplore more uniform remedies for victims of domestic violence," "[r]e-evaluate existing mechanisms at federal, state, local, and tribal levels for protecting victims and punishing offenders," "[e]stablish meaningful standards for enforcement of protection orders," and "[i]nitiate more public education campaigns."[170] After the Supreme Court of the United States held in Town of Castle Rock v. Gonzales (2005) that Jessica Lenahan-Gonzales, a victim of domestic violence, had no constitutional right to the enforcement of her restraining order, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights found that the United States "failed to act with due diligence" to protect Jessica and her daughters Leslie, Katheryn, and Rebecca Gonzales from domestic violence, "which violated the state's obligation not to discriminate and to provide for equal protection before the law."[132] The Commission further held that "the failure of the United States to adequately organize its state structure to protect [Leslie, Katheryn, and Rebecca] from domestic violence was discriminatory and constituted a violation of their right to life."[132]
Freedom from domestic violence resolution movement
Since 2011,[171] thirty-two local governments in the United States have passed resolutions declaring freedom from domestic violence to be a fundamental human right,[172][173] rooted in the recognition of governmental responsibility to ensure this right.[174]
The following City, County, and Municipal Governments have passed resolutions recognizing that freedom from domestic violence is a fundamental human right:[172]
Although the resolutions are not identical, most declare that freedom from domestic violence is a fundamental human right, and further resolve that the state and local governments should secure this human right on behalf of their citizens and should incorporate the resolution's principles into their policies and practices.[173]
Support organizations
Christian
A contributing factor to the disparity of responses to abuse is lack of training. Many Christian seminaries had not educated future church leaders about how to manage violence against women. Once pastors began receiving training, and announced their participation in domestic violence educational programs, they immediately began receiving visits from women church members who had been subject to violence.[206]
The first Theological Education and Domestic Violence Conference, sponsored by the Center for the Prevention of Sexual and Domestic Violence, was held in 1985 to identify topics that should be covered in seminaries. When church leaders first encounter sexual and domestic violence, they need to know what community resources are available. They need to focus on ending the violence, rather than on keeping families together.[206]
One of the Salvation Army's missions is working with victims of domestic abuse. They offer safe housing, therapy, and support.
National Coalition Against Domestic Violence
The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence, otherwise known as the NCADV, is a non-profit organization centered on creating a culture where domestic violence is not tolerated. The NCADV works toward this vision by promoting a society that empowers the victims and survivors of domestic violence and holds their abusers accountable. They work toward their goal of changing society to have a zero tolerance for domestic violence by effecting public policy, increasing understanding of the impact of domestic violence, and providing education and programs for victims.[207]
The NCADV works with national organisations to push for policies and legislation that work to protect victims and survivors of domestic violence. They also offer programs for victims to assist them in rehabilitation such as The Cosmetic and Reconstructive Surgery Program. This program is offered to survivors and consists of plastic surgeons volunteering their services to assist survivors of domestic violence, who cannot afford plastic surgery, in removing their scars left by an abusive partner.[207]
Domestic violence shelters
Domestic violence shelters are buildings, usually sets of apartments, that are set as a place where victims of domestic violence can seek refuge from their abusers. In order to keep the abuser from finding the victim, the location of these shelters are kept confidential. A rise in the building of shelters resulted from reforms in the 1980s and 1990s that restricted government support for women, coinciding with a period when women began to speak out against domestic violence. Reagan's presidency saw cuts to essential programs like Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), food stamps, medicare, housing aid subsidies, daycare, abortion, and family planning, exacerbating gender disparities and socioeconomic hardships, leading to the "feminization of poverty" with more women falling into impoverished conditions.[208] Clinton's era continued these shifts, marked by the passage of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA) in 1996, introducing welfare reform through Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), which disproportionately impacted unmarried mothers and posed significant risks by reducing welfare entitlements.[209] The implementation of work requirements and time limits under TANF also further exacerbated the challenges faced by women experiencing domestic violence, making it difficult for them to access the support they needed to leave abusive situations and rebuild their lives. These shelters that started to form provided the victims with the basic living necessities including food. Some domestic violence shelters have room for victimized mothers to bring their children, therefore offering childcare as well. Although the length of time a person can stay in these shelters is limited, most shelters help victims in finding a permanent home, job, and other necessities one needs to start a new life. Domestic Violence shelters should also be able to refer its victims to other services such as legal help, counseling, support groups, employment programs, health services, and financial opportunities.[210]
Hotlines
The National Domestic Violence Hotline (1-800-799-7233 or 1-800-799-SAFE) is a 24-hour, confidential, toll-free hotline created through the Family Violence Prevention and Services Act. Hotline staff immediately connect the caller to a service provider in his or her area. Highly trained advocates provide support, information, referrals, safety planning, and crisis intervention in 200 languages to hundreds of thousands of domestic violence victims.[211]
Men's groups against domestic violence and forced rape, found around the world, take measures to reduce their use of violence. Typical activities include group discussions, education campaigns and rallies, work with violent men, and workshops in schools, prisons and workplaces. Actions are frequently conducted in collaboration with women's organizations that are involved in preventing violence against women and providing services to abused women. In the United States alone, there are over 100 such men's groups, many of which focus specifically on sexual violence.[213] In San Jose, California, men and boys who have faced domestic abuse can attend support groups and workshops and receive counseling through Next Door Solutions to Domestic Violence (NDS).[214]
State standards
US states use a variety of models in their Batterers Intervention Programs.[215] A few states use the Domestic Abuse Intervention Project (Duluth Model), which was the first multi-disciplinary program designed to coordinate the actions of agencies dealing with domestic violence in Duluth, Minnesota,[216][217] and was featured in a documentary (Power and Control: Domestic Violence in America).[218][219]
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.
Psychological abuse, often known as emotional abuse or mental abuse or psychological violence, is a form of abuse characterized by a person subjecting or exposing another person to a behavior that may result in psychological trauma, including anxiety, chronic depression, clinical depression or post-traumatic stress disorder amongst other psychological problems.
Battered woman syndrome (BWS) is a pattern of signs and symptoms displayed by a woman who has suffered persistent intimate partner violence—psychological, physical, or sexual—from her male partner. It is classified in the ICD-9 as battered person syndrome, but is not in the DSM-5. It may be diagnosed as a subcategory of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Victims may exhibit a range of behaviors, including self-isolation, suicidal thoughts, and substance abuse, and signs of physical injury or illness, such as bruises, broken bones, or chronic fatigue.
Femicide or feminicide is a term for the murdering of females, often because of their gender. In 1976, the feminist author Diana E. H. Russell first implicitly defined the term as a hate killing of females by males but then went on to redefine it as "the killing of females by males because they are female" in later years. Femicide can be perpetrated by either sex but is more often committed by men. This is most likely due to unequal power between men and women as well as harmful gender roles, stereotypes, or social norms.
The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA) is a United States federal law signed by President Bill Clinton on September13, 1994. The Act provided $1.6billion toward investigation and the prosecution of violent crimes against women, imposed automatic and mandatory restitution on those convicted, and allowed civil redress when prosecutors chose not to prosecute cases. The Act also established the Office on Violence Against Women within the U.S. Department of Justice.
Intimate partner violence (IPV) is domestic violence by a current or former spouse or partner in an intimate relationship against the other spouse or partner. IPV can take a number of forms, including physical, verbal, emotional, economic and sexual abuse. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines IPV as "any behavior within an intimate relationship that causes physical, psychological or sexual harm to those in the relationship, including acts of physical aggression, sexual coercion, psychological abuse and controlling behaviors." IPV is sometimes referred to simply as battery, or as spouse or partner abuse.
Domestic violence occurs across the world, in various cultures, and affects people across society, at all levels of economic status; however, indicators of lower socioeconomic status have been shown to be risk factors for higher levels of domestic violence in several studies. In the United States, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics in 1995, women reported a six times greater rate of intimate partner violence than men. However, studies have found that men are much less likely to report victimization in these situations.
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.
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, or combinations of these. 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.
The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to domestic violence:
Domestic violence against men is violence or other physical abuse towards men in a domestic setting, such as in marriage or cohabitation. As with domestic violence against women, violence against men may constitute a crime, but laws vary between jurisdictions. Intimate partner violence (IPV) against men is generally less recognized by society than intimate partner violence against women, which can act as a further block to men reporting their situation or otherwise seeking help.
Domestic violence in India includes any form of violence suffered by a person from a biological relative but typically is the violence suffered by a woman by male members of her family or relatives. Although men also suffer domestic violence, the law under IPC 498A specifically protects only women. Specifically only a woman can file a case of domestic violence. According to a National Family and Health Survey in 2005, total lifetime prevalence of domestic violence was 33.5% and 8.5% for sexual violence among women aged 15–49. A 2014 study in The Lancet reports that although the reported sexual violence rate in India is among the lowest in the world, the large population of India means that the violence affects 27.5 million women over their lifetimes. However, an opinion survey among experts carried out by the Thomson Reuters Foundation ranked India as the most dangerous country in the world for women.
Violence against men comprises violent acts that are disproportionately committed against men or boys. Men are overrepresented as both victims and perpetrators of violence. Violence against women is the opposite category, where acts of violence are targeted against the female gender.
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.
Domestic violence is prominent in Nigeria as in other parts of Africa. There is a deep cultural belief in Nigeria that it is socially acceptable to hit a woman as a disciplinary measure. Cases of Domestic violence are on the high and show no signs of reduction in Nigeria, regardless of age, tribe, religion, or even social status. The CLEEN Foundation reports 1 in every 3 respondents identified themselves as a victim of domestic violence. The survey also found a nationwide increase in domestic violence in the past 3 years from 21% in 2011 to 30% in 2013. A CLEEN Foundation's 2012 National Crime and Safety Survey demonstrated that 31% of the national sample confessed to being victims of domestic violence.
Domestic violence and abuse in the United Kingdom are a range of abusive behaviours that occur within relationships. Domestic violence or abuse can be physical, psychological, sexual, financial or emotional. In UK laws and legislation, the term "domestic abuse" is commonly used to encompass various forms of domestic violence. Some specific forms of domestic violence and abuse are criminal offences. Victims or those at risk of domestic abuse can also be provided with remedies and protection via civil law.
Violence against women in the United States is the use of domestic abuse, murder, sex-trafficking, rape and assault against women in the United States. It has been recognized as a public health concern. Culture in the United States has led towards the trivialization of violence towards women, with media in the United States possibly contributing to making women-directed violence appear unimportant to the public.
Domestic violence in South Korea is the mental, physical, verbal or sexual abuses or crimes of violence committed towards a victim in a domestic setting of marital relations and cohabitation. Domestic violence describes violence towards a domestic partner, towards children and between siblings. According to the Domestic Violence Survey of South Korea in 2010, elder abuse was estimated to be 10%, physical abuse accounted for 2.2%, emotional abuse 9%, economic abuse 1.2%, and neglect 2.5%. Marital violence has been the most prevalent form of family violence in South Korea. One out of six couples in South Korea had more than one episode of physical violence from their spouse.
The boyfriend loophole is a gap in American gun legislation that allows physically abusive ex-romantic partners and stalkers with previous convictions or restraining orders to access guns. While individuals who have been convicted of, or are under a restraining order for, domestic violence are prohibited from owning a firearm, the prohibition only applies if the victim was the perpetrator's spouse or cohabitant, or if the perpetrator had a child with the victim.
References
Notes
↑ Martin S. Fiebert of the Department of Psychology at California State University, Long Beach, has compiled an annotated bibliography of research relating to spousal abuse by women on men. This bibliography examines 275 scholarly investigations: 214 empirical studies and 61 reviews and/or analyses appear to demonstrate that women are as physically aggressive, or more aggressive, than men in their relationships with their spouses or male partners. The aggregate sample size in the reviewed studies exceeds 365,000.[35] In a Los Angeles Times article about male victims of domestic violence, Fiebert suggests that "...consensus in the field is that women are as likely as men to strike their partner but that—as expected—women are more likely to be injured than men."[36]
↑ The National Institute of Justice states that studies finding equal or greater frequency of abuse by women against men are based on data compiled through the Conflict Tactics Scale. This survey tool was developed in the 1970s and may not be appropriate for intimate partner violence research because it does not measure control, coercion, or the motives for conflict tactics; it also leaves out sexual assault and violence by ex-spouses or partners and does not determine who initiated the violence.[39]
↑ "He concludes that conservative Protestant fathers' neotraditional parenting style seems to be closer to the authoritative style—characterized by moderately high levels of parental control and high levels of parental supportiveness—that has been linked to positive outcomes among children and adolescents."
↑ 'The upshot is that we have no evidence so far that a gender-traditionalist ideology—at least of the soft patriarchal variety—is a strong predictor of domestic physical abuse.'
↑ "Gender hierarchicalist males—at least those who have frequent and active church involvement—turn out, on average, to be better men than their theories: more often than not, they are functional egalitarians, and the rhetoric of male headship may actually be functioning as a covert plea for greater male responsibility and nurturant involvement on the home front."
↑ Rogers, Kenneth; Baumgardner, Barbara; Connors, Kathleen; Martens, Patricia; Kiser, Laurel (2010), "Prevention of family violence", in Compton, Michael T. (ed.), Clinical manual of prevention in mental health (1sted.), Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing, p.245, ISBN9781585623471, Women are more often the victims of domestic violence than men and are more likely to suffer injuries and health consequences...
↑ "National Statistics". NCADV. National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. Archived from the original on 27 May 2019. Retrieved 14 May 2019.
↑ Bachman, Ronet; Carmody, Dianne Cyr (December 1994). "Fighting fire with fire: the effects of victim resistance in intimate versus stranger perpetrated assaults against females". Journal of Family Violence. 9 (4): 317–331. doi:10.1007/BF01531942. S2CID25399778.
↑ Saunders, Daniel G. (1988), "Wife abuse, husband abuse, or mutual combat? A feminist perspective on the empirical findings", in Yllö, Kersti; Bograd, Michele Louise (eds.), Feminist perspectives on wife abuse, Newbury Park, California: Sage Publications, pp.90–113, ISBN9780803930537.
↑ "Domestic Violence Statistics". The Gateway Center For Domestic Violence Services. City of Portland, Oregon. 9 September 2010. Archived from the original on 20 May 2022. Retrieved 5 October 2018.
↑ "National Statistics". NCADV. National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. Archived from the original on 27 May 2019. Retrieved 5 October 2018.
↑ Johnson, L. (20 May 1991). On the front lines: police stress and family well-being. Government Printing Office. pp.32–48., Hearing Before the Select Committee on Children, Youth, and Families, U.S. House of Representatives, 102 Congress, First Session
1 2 Russell, Brenda L; Pappas, Nicholas (11 June 2018). "Officer involved domestic violence". International Journal of Police Science & Management. 20 (2): 135. doi:10.1177/1461355718774579. S2CID150327201.
↑ Mennicke, Annelise M.; Ropes, Katie (November 2016). "Estimating the rate of domestic violence perpetrated by law enforcement officers: A review of methods and estimates". Aggression and Violent Behavior. 31: 157–164. doi:10.1016/j.avb.2016.09.003.
↑ McPhedran, Samara; Gover, Angela R.; Paul Mazerolle (15 May 2017). "A cross-national comparison of police attitudes about domestic violence: a focus on gender". Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management. 40 (2): 214–227. doi:10.1108/PIJPSM-06-2016-0083. hdl:10072/338490.
Second version published as: Fiebert, Martin S. (June 2004). "References examining assaults by women on their spouses or male partners: an annotated bibliography". Sexuality and Culture. 8 (3–4): 140–176. doi:10.1007/s12119-004-1001-6. S2CID195302233.
Third version published as: Fiebert, Martin S. (March 2010). "References examining assaults by women on their spouses or male partners: an annotated bibliography". Sexuality and Culture. 14 (1): 49–91. doi:10.1007/s12119-009-9059-9. S2CID2850888.
Fourth version published as: Fiebert, Martin S. (June 2014). "References examining assaults by women on their spouses or male partners: an annotated bibliography". Sexuality and Culture. 18 (2): 405–467. doi:10.1007/s12119-013-9194-1. S2CID14991601. Available to download as a word document here.Archived 2014-11-17 at the Wayback Machine
↑ Browne, Angela; Williams, Kirk R. (1989). "Exploring the effect of resource availability and the likelihood of female-perpetrated homicides". Law and Society Review. 23 (1): 75–94. doi:10.2307/3053881. JSTOR3053881.
1 2 Straus, Murray A. (1999), "The controversy over domestic violence by women: a methodological, theoretical, and sociology of science analysis", in Arriaga, Ximena B.; Oskamp, Stuart (eds.), Violence in intimate relationships, Thousand Oaks, California: Sage Publications, pp.17–44, ISBN9780761916437.
↑ Archer, John (September 2000). "Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: a meta-analytic review". Psychological Bulletin. 126 (5): 651–680. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.126.5.651. PMID10989615. Meta-analyses of sex differences in physical aggression to heterosexual partners and in its physical consequences are reported. Women were slightly more likely (d = –.05) than men to use one or more acts of physical aggression and to use such acts more frequently. Men were more likely (d = .15) to inflict an injury, and overall, 62% of those injured by a partner were women.Pdf.Archived 2017-03-17 at the Wayback Machine
Frieze, Irene (September 2000). "Violence in close relationships—development of a research area: Comment on Archer". Psychological Bulletin. 126 (5): 681–684. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.126.5.681. PMID10989616. Assumptions of and conclusions made by feminist researchers about the problems of battered wives are reviewed. It is argued that their focus on marital violence as a form of aggression against women by men and their concern for severely beaten wives may have caused them to ignore high levels of female violence in marriage and dating. J. Archer's meta-analysis of studies of marital and dating violence showed that both sexes display violence in these relationships, although women are more likely to be injured.
O'Leary, K. Daniel (September 2000). "Are women really more aggressive than men in intimate relationships? Comment on Archer". Psychological Bulletin. 126 (5): 685–689. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.126.5.685. PMID10989617. J. Archer's conclusion that women engage in slightly more physical aggression than men in intimate relationships but sustain more injuries is reasonable in representative samples.
1 2 Fridel, Emma E.; Fox, James Alan (March 2019). "Gender Differences in Patterns and Trends in U.S. Homicide, 1976–2017". Violence and Gender. 6 (1): 27–36. doi:10.1089/vio.2019.0005. S2CID150775576.
↑ Karmen, Andrew (13 April 2015). Crime Victims: An Introduction to Victimology. Cengage Learning. p.298. ISBN978-1-305-46549-7. "African-American women faced higher risks, and Hispanic and Asian women faced lower risks of beatings than white women in 2010 (Catalano, 2012)."
↑ "Violence Against Women, A Majority Staff Report," Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, 102nd Congress, October 1992, p.3.
↑ "Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of Violence Against Women." U.S. Department of Justice. November 1998. Retrieved November 20, 2011.
↑ "Economic Abuse"(PDF). National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. The Public Policy Office of the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. Archived from the original(PDF) on 28 February 2013. Retrieved 24 November 2014.
↑ "Domestic violence". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Archived from the original on November 23, 2011. Retrieved October 31, 2011. In the early 1800s most legal systems implicitly accepted wife-beating as a husband's right, part of his entitlement to control over the resources and services of his wife.
1 2 Daniels, Cynthia R. (1997). Feminists Negotiate the State: The Politics of Domestic Violence. Lanham: Univ. Press of America. pp.5–10. ISBN978-0-7618-0884-8.
↑ "Domestic violence". Encyclopædia Britannica Online. Archived from the original on November 23, 2011. Retrieved October 31, 2011. Feminist agitation in the 1800s produced a sea change in public opinion...
↑ Gordon, Linda (2002). Heroes of Their Own Lives: The Politics and History of Family Violence. Urbana: University of Illinois Press. pp.253–255. ISBN978-0-252-07079-2.
↑ Pleck, Elizabeth (1989). "Criminal Approaches to Family Violence". Family Violence. 11.
↑ Pleck, Elizabeth (1979). "Wife Beating in Nineteenth-Century America". Victimology. 4: 64–65.
↑ Arnot, Margaret L.; Usborne, Cornelie (2003). Gender and crime in modern Europe ([Online-Ausg.]ed.). London: Routledge. p.123. ISBN978-1-85728-746-2.
↑ Green, Nicholas St. John. 1879. Criminal Law Reports: Being Reports of Cases Determined in the Federal and State Courts of the United States, and in the Courts of England, Ireland, Canada, etc. with notes. Hurd and Houghton. "The cases in the American courts are uniform against the right of the husband to use any [physical] chastisement, moderate or otherwise, toward the wife, for any purpose."
↑ Feder, Lynette (1999). Women and Domestic Violence: An Interdisciplinary Approach. New York: Haworth Press. p.22. ISBN978-0-7890-0667-7.
1 2 Laws on violence against women.Archived 2017-06-28 at the Wayback Machine Office on Women's Health, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. May 18, 2011. Retrieved November 20, 2011.
↑ "California Penal Code, Sec. 243". California Legislative Information. California State Legislature. Archived from the original on 17 October 2018. Retrieved 16 October 2018.
↑ "California Penal Code, Sec. 243". California Legislative Information. California State Legislature. Archived from the original on 27 February 2019. Retrieved 16 October 2018.
↑ McQuigg, Ronagh J.A. (2011), "Potential problems for the effectiveness of international human rights law as regards domestic violence", in McQuigg, Ronagh J.A. (ed.), International human rights law and domestic violence: the effectiveness of international human rights law, Oxford New York: Taylor & Francis, p.13, ISBN9781136742088, archived from the original on 2016-05-15, This is an issue that affects vast numbers of women throughout all nations of the world. ... Although there are cases in which men are the victims of domestic violence, nevertheless 'the available research suggests that domestic violence is overwhelmingly directed by men against women ... In addition, violence used by men against female partners tends to be much more severe than that used by women against men. Mullender and Morley state that 'Domestic violence against women is the most common form of family violence worldwide.'
1 2 Criminal Law Cases and Materials, 7th ed. 2012, John Kaplan, Robert Weisberg, Guyora Binder
↑ The Meaning of Equality for Battered Woman Who Kill Men in Self-Defense, PL Crocker - Harvard Women's LJ, 1985
↑ A Trend Emerges: A State Survey on the Admissibility of Expert Testimony concerning the Battered Woman Syndrome, A CL Coffee - J. Fam. L., 1986
↑ Factors predicting verdicts in cases where battered women kill their husbands, Follingstad, Diane R.; Polek, Darlene S.; Hause, Elizabeth S.; Deaton, Lenne H.; Bulger, Michael W.; Conway, Zanthia D., Law and Human Behavior, Vol 13(3), Sep 1989, 253-269
↑ Dubber, Markus, and Hörnle, Tatjana. Criminal Law: A Comparative Approach. United Kingdom, OUP Oxford, 2014. Page 445.
↑ Garner, J.; F. Clemmer (1986). "Danger to Police in Domestic Disturbances—A New Look". Bureau of Justice Statistics.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
↑ Stanford, M. R.; B. I. Mowry (1990). "Domestic Disturbance Danger Rate". Journal of Police Science and Administration. 17: 244–9.
↑ Straus, M.; Gelles, R. & Steinmetz, S. (1980). Behind Closed Doors: Violence in the American Family. Anchor/Doubleday. ISBN978-0-385-14259-5.
↑ Police Foundation (1976). "Domestic Violence and the Police: Studies in Detroit and Kansas City". The Police Foundation.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
↑ Gelles, R. J. (1993). "Constraints Against Family Violence: How Well Do They Work". American Behavioral Scientist. 36 (5): 575–586. doi:10.1177/0002764293036005003. S2CID72484358.
1 2 Buzawa, E. S.; C. G. Buzawa (1990). Domestic Violence: The Criminal Justice Response. Sage. pp.94–9. ISBN978-0-7619-2448-7.
↑ Elliott, Delbert S. (1989). "Criminal Justice Procedures in Family Violence Crimes". In Oblin, Lloyd and Michael Tonry (ed.). Family Violence. Crime and Justice: A Review of Research. University of Chicago. pp.427–80.
↑ Buzawa, Eva Schlesinger; Buzawa, Carl G. (2003). Domestic Violence: The Criminal Justice Response. SAGE. p.136. ISBN978-0-7619-2448-7. "For example, a woman who has been the victim in an ongoing pattern of violence may find that the police arrive only to misinterpret an act of self defense on her part out of context, resulting in her arrest. The inability or refusal of police to distinguish victims from offenders is one possible explanation for the existence of high dual arrests rates. To address this concern, some states, beginning with Washington in 1985, started enacting "primary" or "predominant aggressor" laws. Currently, 22 states have such laws."
↑ Buzawa & Buzawa 2003, p.136:"She found a dual arrest rate of 33% in adult intimate partner violence cases. Compared with incidents resulting in single arrest, dual arrest cases were more likely to involve young white White women who were unmarried and living with the codefendant."
1 2 Adams, Carol J.; Fortune, Mary M. (1998). Violence against women and children: a Christian Theologocial Sourcebook. New York: The Continuum Publishing Company. Page 10. ISBN0-8264-0830-3.
1 2 "Mission". Ncadv.org. Archived from the original on 2015-09-07. Retrieved 2015-11-03.
Carol J. Adams; Marie M. Fortune, eds. (1995). Violence against Women and Children: A Christian Theological Sourcebook. New York: Continuum. ISBN978-0-8264-0830-3.
Marie M. Fortune (1991). Violence in the Family: a Workshop Curriculum for Clergy and Other Helpers. Cleveland: Pilgrim. ISBN978-0-8298-0908-4.
Anne L. Horton; Judith A. Williamson, eds. (1988). Abuse and Religion: When Praying Isn't Enough. Lexington, Massachusetts: Lexington Books. ISBN978-0-669-15337-8.
Mary D. Pellauer; Barbara Chester; Jane A. Boyajian, eds. (1987). Sexual Assault and Abuse: A Handbook for Clergy and Religious Professionals. San Francisco: Harper & Row. ISBN978-0-06-254810-8.
domesticshelters.org searchable online directory of 3,000 domestic violence agencies in U.S., a free service of National Coalition Against Domestic Violence and Theresa's Fund
FaithTrust Institute (formerly Center for the Prevention of Sexual and Domestic Violence), a multifaith, multicultural training and education organization in the United States with global reach working to end sexual and domestic violence.
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.
