Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Handbook of Interpersonal Violence and Abuse Across the Lifespan pp 1–30Cite as

A Feminist Perspective on the Criminal Justice System Response to Domestic Violence

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:

Abstract

The feminist movement’s work during the 1960s and 1970s shaped how the criminal justice system currently responds to intimate partner violence (IPV). Feminist perspectives continue to alter social perceptions of IPV and drive criminal justice reform. Grassroots efforts are credited for mobilizing the criminal justice system to implement improved responses by law enforcement, judicial systems, correctional systems, and policymakers to address IPV. This chapter focuses on how the criminal justice system’s response to IPV developed over time. Specifically, it discusses how mandatory and preferred arrest laws have shaped law enforcement practices in cases of IPV. Additionally, domestic violence courts and no-drop prosecution policies are discussed as the judiciary’s response to IPV. Batterer intervention treatment standards are reviewed as the overarching framework for a correctional and rehabilitative program for offenders. Finally, the chapter examines how such efforts have generated unintended consequences for victims and highlights innovative criminal justice initiatives that target violence between intimate partners.

This chapter was initially published with an incorrect copyright holder name. It has been corrected to © Springer Nature Switzerland AG.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

References

  • Ake, J., & Arnold, G. (2017). A brief history of anti-violence against women movements in the U.S. In C. Renzetti, J. Edelson, & R. Bergen (Eds.), Sourcebook on violence against women (3rd ed., pp. 3–25). Los Angeles: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ammar, N. H., Orloff, L. E., Dutton, M. A., & Hass, G. A. (2012). Battered immigrant women in the United States and protection orders: An exploratory research. Criminal Justice Review, 37(3), 337–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Archer, J. (2000). Sex differences in aggression between heterosexual partners: A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 126(5), 651–680.

    Google Scholar 

  • Asmus, M. E., Ritmeester, T., & Pence, E. L. (1991). Prosecuting domestic abuse cases in Duluth: Developing effective prosecution strategies from understanding the dynamics of abusive relationships. Hamline Law Review, 15(1), 115–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Babcock, J. C., & Steiner, R. (1999). The relationship between treatment, incarceration, and recidivism of battering: A program evaluation of Seattle’s coordinated community response to domestic violence. Journal of Family Psychology, 13(1), 46–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bales, W., Mann, K., Blomberg, T., Gaes, G., Barrick, K., Dhungana, K., & McManus, B. (2010). A quantitative and qualitative assessment of electronic monitoring (Report No. 2007-IJ-CX-0017). U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/230530.pdf.

  • Balos, B., & Trotzky, I. (1988). Enforcement of the domestic abuse act in Minnesota: A preliminary study. Law and Inequality, 6(2), 82–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barata, P. C., & Schneider, F. (2004). Battered women add their voices to the debate about the merits of mandatory arrest. Women’s Studies Quarterly, 32(3/4), 148–163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barata, P., & Senn, C. Y. (2003). When two fields collide: An examination of the assumptions of social science research and law within the domain of domestic violence. Trauma, Violence, and Abuse, 4(1), 3–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bard, M., & Zacker, J. (1971). The prevention of family violence: Dilemmas of community interaction. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 33(4), 677–682.

    Google Scholar 

  • Black, M. C. (2011). Intimate partner violence and adverse health consequences: Implications for clinicians. American Journal of Lifestyle Medicine, 5(5), 428–439.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boal, A. L., & Mankowski, E. S. (2014). Barriers to compliance with Oregon batterer intervention program standards. Violence and Victims, 29(4), 607.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bouffard, J. A., & Muftic, L. R. (2007). An examination of the outcomes of various components of a coordinated community response to domestic violence by male offenders. Journal of Family Violence, 22, 353–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Champagne, F. (2015). Prosecuting domestic violence cases. Criminal Litigation, 16(1), 2–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesney-Lind, M. (2002). Criminalizing victimization: The unintended consequences of pro-arrest policies for girls and women. Criminology and Public Policy, 2, 81–90.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coker, A. L., Davis, K. E., Arias, I., Desai, S., Sanderson, M., Brandt, H. M., & Smith, P. H. (2002). Physical and mental health effects of intimate partner violence for men and women. American Journal of Preventative Medicine, 23(4), 260–268.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corsilles, A. (1994). No-drop policies in the prosecution of domestic violence cases: Guarantee to action or dangerous solution. Fordham Law Review, 63, 853.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crager, M., Cousin, M., & Hardy, T. (2003). Victim-defendants: An emerging challenge in responding to domestic violence in Seattle and the King County. The Region. Retrieved from http://www.mincava.umn.edu/documents/victimdefendant/victimdefendant.pdf.

  • Davis, R. C., Smith, B. E., & Davies, H. J. (2001). Effects of no-drop prosecution of domestic violence upon conviction rates. Justice Research and Policy, 3(2), 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeCarlo, A. (2016). No drop prosecution and domestic violence: Screening for cooperation in the city that never speaks. Journal of Law and Public Policy, 25(1), 357–397.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeLeon-Granados, W., Wells, W., & Binsbacher, R. (2006). Arresting developments: Trends in female arrests for domestic violence and proposed explanations. Violence Against Women, 12(4), 355–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dempsey, M. M. (2007). Toward a feminist state: What does ‘effective’ prosecution of domestic violence mean? The Modern Law Review, 70(6), 908–935.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dugan, L., Nagin, D. S., & Rosenfeld, R. (1999). Explaining the decline in intimate partner homicide: The effects of changing domesticity, women’s status, and domestic violence resources. Homicide Studies, 3(3), 187–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Durfee, A. (2012). Situational ambiguity and gendered patterns of arrest for intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women, 18(1), 64–84.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, D. G., & Corvo, K. (2006). Transforming a flawed policy: A call to revive psychology and science in domestic violence research and practice. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 11(5), 457–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eitle, D. (2005). The influence of mandatory arrest policies, police organizational characteristics, and situational variables on the probability of arrest in domestic violence cases. Crime and Delinquency, 51(4), 573–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Erez, E., Ibarra, P., & Gur, O. (2012a). GPS monitoring technologies and domestic violence: An evaluation study (#2007-IJ-CX-0016). Department of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/238910.pdf.

  • Erez, E., Ibarra, P. R., Bales, W., & Gur, O. M. (2012b). GPS monitoring technologies and domestic violence: An evaluation study (Report no. 2007-IJ-CX-0016). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/238910.pdf.

  • Fagan, J. (1996). The criminalization of domestic violence: Promises and limits (Report no. NCJ 157641). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, U.S. Department of Justice. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/crimdom.pdf.

  • Feld, S., & Straus, M. (1989). Escalation and desistance of wife assault in marriage. Criminology, 27(1), 141–161.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferraro, K. J. (1989). Policing woman battering. Social Problems, 36(1), 61–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferraro, K. J. (1995). Cops, courts, and woman battering. In B. R. Price & N. J. Skoloff (Eds.), The criminal justice system and women: Offenders, victims, and workers (pp. 262–271). New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferraro, K. (2017). Current research on batterer intervention programs and implications for policy. Battered Women’s Justice Project, 1–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finn, M. A. (2013). Overview of: “Evidence-based and victim-centered prosecutorial policies: Examination of deterrent and therapeutic jurisprudence effects on domestic violence”. Criminology and Public Policy, 12(3), 441–442.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford, D. A. (2003). Coercing victim participation in domestic violence prosecutions. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 18(6), 669–684.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford, D. A., & Regoli, J. (1992). The preventive impact of policies for prosecuting wife batterers. In E. Buzawa & C. Buzawa (Eds.), Domestic violence: The changing criminal justice response (pp. 181–207). Westport: Greenwood.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ford, D. A., & Regoli, J. (1993). The criminal prosecution of wife assaulters: Process, problems, and effects. In N. Z. Hilton (Ed.), Legal responses to wife assault: Current trends and evaluation (pp. 127–164). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Frye, V., Haviland, M., & Rajah, V. (2007). Dual arrest and other unintended consequences of mandatory arrest in New York City: A brief report. Journal of Family Violence, 22(6), 397–405.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gamache, D. J., Edleson, J. L., & Schock, M. (1988). Coordinated police, judicial and social service response to woman battering: A multi-baseline evaluation across three communities. In G. T. Hotaling, D. Finkelhor, J. T. Kirkpatrick, & M. Straus (Eds.), Coping with family violence: Research and policy perspectives (pp. 193–209). Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garner, J. H., & Maxwell, C. D. (2008). Coordinated community responses to intimate partner violence in the 20th and 21st centuries [policy essay]. Reducing Intimate Partner Violence, Criminology and Public Policy, 7(4), 301–311.

    Google Scholar 

  • Garner, J. H., Fagan, J. A., & Maxwell, C. D. (1995). Published findings from the spouse assault replication program: A critical review. Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 11(1), 3–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gondolf, E. (2000). Reassault at 30-months after batterer program intake. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44, 111–238.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodmark, L. (2009). Reframing domestic violence law and policy: An anti-essentialist proposal. Journal of Law and Public Policy, 31, 39–56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goolkasian, G. (1986). Confronting domestic violence: A guide for criminal justice agencies. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, Research in Brief, US Department of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gover, A. R. (2009). Domestic violence. In J. M. Miller (Ed.), 21st century criminology: A reference handbook (pp. 472–480). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gover, A., MacDonald, J., & Alpert, J. A. (2003). Combating domestic violence: Findings from an evaluation of a local domestic violence court. Criminology and Public Policy, 3(1), 109–132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gover, A. R., Brank, E. M., & MacDonald, J. M. (2007). A specialized domestic violence court in South Carolina: An example of procedural justice for victims and defendants. Violence Against Women, 13(6), 603–626.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gover, A. R., Welton-Mitchell, C., Belknap, J., & Deprince, A. P. (2013). When abuse happens again: Women’s reasons for not reporting new incidents of intimate partner abuse to law enforcement. Women and Criminal Justice, 23(2), 99–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gover, A. Richards, T. N. & Tomsich, L. (2015). Colorado’s innovative response to domestic violence offender treatment: Current achievements and recommendations for the future. Denver: Buechner Institute for Governance, Criminology and Criminal Justice Research Initiative, University of Colorado Denver. Submitted to Colorado Domestic Violence Offender Management Board.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, M. (1988). Feminism, feelings and philosophy. In M. Griffiths & M. Whitford (Eds.), Feminist perspectives in philosophy (pp. 131–151). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gur, O. M., Ibarra, P., & Erez, E. (2015). Specialization and the use of GPS for domestic violence by pretrial programs: Findings from a national survey of U.S. practitioners. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 34(1), 32–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guzik, K. (2007). The forces of conviction: The power and practice of mandatory prosecution upon misdemeanor domestic battery suspects. Law and Social Inquiry, 32(1), 41–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R. J. (2014). Feminist strategies to end violence against women. In R. Baksh & W. Harcourt (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of transnational feminist movements (retrieved online). New York: Oxford. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199943494.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199943494-e-005.

  • Hamberger, L. K., & Larsen, L. (2015). Men’s and women’s experience with intimate partner violence: A review of ten years of comparative studies in clinical samples; Part 1. Journal of Family Violence, 30, 699–717.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hamberger, L. K., & Potente, T. (1994). Counseling heterosexual women arrested for domestic violence: Implications for theory and practice. Violence and Victims, 9(2), 125–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanna, C. (1996). No right to choose: Mandated victim participation in domestic violence prosecutions. Harvard Law Review, 109(8), 1849–1191.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henning, K., & Renauer, B. (2005). Prosecution of women arrested for intimate partner abuse. Violence and Victims, 20(3), 361–376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Henning, K., Renauer, B., & Holdford, R. (2006). Victim or offender? Heterogeneity among women arrested for intimate partner violence. Journal of Family Violence, 21(6), 351–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herman, K., Rotunda, R., Williamson, G., & Vodanovich, S. (2014). Outcomes from a Duluth model batterer intervention program at completion and long term follow-up. Journal of Offender Rehabilitation, 53(1), 1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hetling, A., & Zhang, H. (2010). Domestic violence, poverty, and social services: Does location matter? Social Science Quarterly, 91(5), 1144–1163.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschel, D. (2008). Domestic violence cases: What research shows about arrest and dual arrest rates. National Institute of Justice ePub. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/App/Publications/abstract.aspx?ID=244581.

  • Hirschel, D., & Buzawa, E. (2012). The role and impact of primary aggressor laws and policies. Journal of Police Crisis Negotiations, 12(2), 165–182.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschel, D., & Deveau, L. (2017). The impact of primary aggressor laws on single versus dual arrest in incidents of intimate partner violence. Violence Against Women, 23(10), 1155–1176.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschel, J. D., & Hutchinson, I. W. (1992). Female spouse abuse and the police response: The Charlotte, North Carolina experiment. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 83(1), 73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirschel, D., Buzawa, E., Pattavina, A., & Faggiani, D. (2007). Domestic violence and mandatory arrest laws: To what extent do they influence police arrest decisions? Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 98(1), 255–298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ho, T. (2000). Domestic violence in a Southern city: The effects of a mandatory arrest policy on male-versus-female aggravated assault incidents. American Journal of Criminal Justice, 25(1), 107–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horton, A. L., Simonidis, K. M., & Simonidis, L. L. (1987). Legal remedies for spousal abuse: Victim characteristics, expectations, and satisfaction. Journal of Family Violence, 2(3), 265–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Houston, C. (2014). How feminist theory became (criminal) law: Tracing the path to mandatory criminal intervention in domestic violence cases. Michigan Journal of Gender and Law, 21(2), 217–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huisman, K., Martinez, J., & Wilson, C. (2005). Training police officers on domestic violence and racism: Challenges and strategies. Violence Against Women, 11(6), 792–821.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ibarra, P., Gur, O., & Erez, E. (2014). Surveillance as casework: Supervising domestic violence defendants with GPS technology. Crime, Law and Social Change, 62(4), 417–444.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Association of Chiefs of Police. (1967). Training key 16: Handling domestic disturbance calls. Gaithersburg: IACP.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klevens, J., Baker, C. K., Shelley, G. A., & Ingram, E. M. (2008). Exploring the links between components of coordinated community responses and their impact on contact with intimate partner violence services. Violence Against Women, 14(3), 346–358.

    Google Scholar 

  • Labriola, M., Bradley, S., O’Sullivan, C., Rempel, M., & Moore, S. (2009). A national portrait of domestic violence courts. New York: Center for Court Innovation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Langan, P. A., & Innes, C. A. (1986). Preventing domestic violence against women. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lanza-Kaduce, L., Greenleaf, R., & Donahue, M. (1995). Trickle-up report writing: The impact of a proarrest policy for domestic disturbances. Justice Quarterly, 12(3), 525–542.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leisenring, A. (2008). Controversies surrounding mandatory arrest policies and the police response to intimate partner violence. Sociology Compass, 2(2), 451–466.

    Google Scholar 

  • Levine, E. C. (2018). Sexual scripts and criminal statutes: Gender restrictions, spousal allowances, and victim accountability after rape law reform. Violence Against Women, 24(3), 322–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacKinnon, C. A. (1983). Feminism, Marxism, method, and the state: Toward feminist jurisprudence. Signs, 8(4), 635–658.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maiuri, R. D., & Eberle, J. E. (2008). State standards for domestic violence perpetrator treatment: Current status, trends, and recommendations. Violence and Victims, 23(2), 133–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, D. (1976). Battered wives. San Francisco: Glide.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, M. E. (1997). Double your trouble: Dual arrest in family violence. Journal of Family Violence, 12(2), 139–157.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maxwell, C. D., Garner, J. H., & Fagan, J. A. (2002). The preventive effects of arrest on intimate partner violence: Research, policy and theory. Criminology and Public Policy, 2(1), 51–80.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messing, J. T., Ward-Lasher, A., Thaller, J., & Bagwell-Gray, M. E. (2015). The state of intimate partner violence intervention: Progress and continuing challenges. Social Work, 60(4), 305–313.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miccio, G. K. (2005). A house divided: Mandatory arrest, domestic violence, and the conservatization of the battered women’s movement. Houston Law Review, 42(2), 237–323.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S. L. (2001). The paradox of women arrested for domestic violence: Criminal justice professionals and service providers respond. Violence Against Women, 7(12), 1339–1376.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, S. L. (2005). Victims as offenders: The paradox of women’s violence in relationships. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mills, L. G. (2003). Insult to injury: Rethinking our responses to intimate abuse. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, C. M., Musser, P. H., & Maton, K. I. (1998). Coordinated community intervention for domestic abusers: Intervention system involvement and criminal recidivism. Journal of Family Violence, 13(3), 263–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nichols, A. J. (2014). No-drop prosecution in domestic violence cases: Survivor-defined and social change approaches to victim advocacy. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 29(11), 2114–2142.

    Google Scholar 

  • Novisky, M. A., & Peralta, R. L. (2015). When women tell: Intimate partner violence and the factors related to police notification. Violence Against Women, 21(1), 65–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oliver, W. (2000). Preventing domestic violence in the African American community: The rationale for popular culture interventions. Violence Against Women, 6(5), 533–549.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, B. J. (2003). Domestic violence courts. Criminology and Public Policy, 3(1), 105–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parnas, R. I. (1967). The police response to the domestic disturbance. Wisconsin Law Review, 31, 914–960.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pate, A., & Hamilton, E. (1992). Formal and informal deterrents to domestic violence: The Dade county spouse assault experiment. American Sociological Review, 57(5), 691–697.

    Google Scholar 

  • Paymar, M., & Barnes, G. (2007). Countering confusion about the Duluth model. Duluth: Domestic Abuse Intervention Programs. Retrieved from https://www.theduluthmodel.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/CounteringConfusion.pdf.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pence, E., & Paymar, M. (1993). Education groups for men who batter: The Duluth model. New York: Springer Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petrosky, E., Blair, J. M., Betz, C. J., Fowler, K. A., Shane, J. P. D., & Lyons, B. H. (2017). Racial and ethnic differences in homicides of adult women and the role of intimate partner violence—United States, 2003–2014. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 66(28), 741–746.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, S. W., & Sobol, J. J. (2010). Twenty years of mandatory arrest: Police decision making in the face of legal requirements. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 21(1), 98–118.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pleck, E. (1987). Domestic tyranny: The making of American social policy against family violence from colonial times to the present. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pollack, S., Green, V., & Allspach, A. (2005). Women charged with domestic violence in Toronto: The unintended consequences of mandatory charge policies. Toronto: Woman Abuse Council of Toronto.

    Google Scholar 

  • Porter, R., Rempel, M., & Mansky, A. (2010). What makes a court problem-solving? Universal performance indicators for problem-solving justice. Center for Court Innovation. Retrieved from https://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/What_Makes_A_Court_P_S.pdf.

  • Post, L. A., Klevens, J., Maxwell, C. D., Shelley, G. A., & Ingram, E. M. (2010). An examination of whether coordinated community responses affect intimate partner violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 25(1), 75–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Prokos, A., & Padavic, I. (2002). ‘There oughtta be a law against bitches’: Masculinity lessons in police academy training. Gender, Work and Organization, 9(4), 439–459.

    Google Scholar 

  • Quigley, B. M., & Leonard, K. E. (1996). Desistance of husband aggression in the early years of marriage. Violence and Victims, 11(4), 355–370.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rajan, M., & McCloskey, K. A. (2007). Victims of intimate partner violence: Arrest rates across recent studies. Journal of Aggression, Maltreatment and Trauma, 15(3–4), 27–52.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richie, B. E. (2012). Arrested justice: Black women, violence, and America’s prison nation. New York: NYU Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robbins, K. (1999). No-drop prosecution of domestic violence: Just good policy, or equal protection mandate? Stanford Law Review, 52, 205–233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruttenberg, M. H. (1994). A feminist critique of mandatory arrest: An analysis of race and gender in domestic violence policy. Journal of Gender and the Law, 2, 171–199.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, J. D., & Sherman, L. W. (1993). Does arrest deter domestic violence. American Behavioral Scientist, 36(5), 601–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott v. Hart, C-76-2395 N.D. Cal. 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, L. W., & Berk, R. A. (1984). The specific deterrent effects of arrest for domestic assault. American Sociological Review, 49(2), 261–272.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, L. W., & Smith, D. A. (1992). Crime, punishment and stake in conformity: Legal and informal control of domestic violence. American Sociological Review, 57(5), 680–690.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sherman, L., Smith, D., Schmidt, J., & Rogan, D. P. (1992). Crime, punishment, and stake in conformity: Legal and informal control of domestic violence. American Sociological Review, 57(5), 680–690.

    Google Scholar 

  • Simpson, S. S., Bouffard, L. A., Garner, J., & Hickman, L. (2006). The influence of legal reform on the probability of arrest in domestic violence cases. Justice Quarterly, 23(3), 297–316.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A. (2000). It’s my decision, isn’t it? A research note on battered women’s perceptions of mandatory intervention laws. Violence Against Women, 6(12), 1384–1402.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, S. G., Chen, J., Basile, K. C., Gilbert, L. K., Merrick, M. T., Patel, N., Walling, M., & Jain, A. (2017). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010-2012 state report. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Center for Disease Control. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/NISVS-StateReportBook.pdf.

  • Spohn, C. (2008). Editorial introduction to coordinated community response to intimate partner violence. Criminology and Public Policy, 7(4), 489–493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinman, M. (1991). Coordinated criminal justice interventions and recidivism among batterers. In M. Steinman (Ed.), Woman battering: Policy responses (pp. 221–236). Cincinnati: Anderson Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Strack, G. B. (2000). “She hit me, too.” Identifying the primary aggressor: A prosecutor’s perspective. Retrieved from http://www.ncdsv.org/images/she_hit_me.pdf.

  • Sullivan, C. M. (2006). Interventions to address intimate partner violence: The current state of the field. In J. R. Lutzker (Ed.), Preventing violence: Research and evidence-based intervention strategies (pp. 195–212). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Syers, M., & Edleson, J. L. (1992). The combined effects of coordinated criminal justice intervention in woman abuse. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 7(4), 490–502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thurman v. City of Torrington, DC, 595 F. Supp. 1521. 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tolman, R. M., & Weisz, A. (1995). Coordinated community intervention for domestic violence: The effects of arrest and prosecution on recidivism of woman abuse perpetrators. Crime and Delinquency, 41(4), 481–495.

    Google Scholar 

  • Truninger, E. (1971). Marital violence: The legal solutions. Hastings Law Journal, 23(1), 259–276.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsai, B. (2000). The trend toward specialized domestic violence courts: Improvements on an effective innovation. Fordham Law Review, 68, 1285–1327.

    Google Scholar 

  • Visher, C. A., Harrell, A., Newmark, L., & Yahner, J. (2008). Reducing intimate partner violence: An evaluation of a comprehensive justice system community collaboration. Criminology and Public Policy, 7(4), 495–523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagers, S. M., Wareham, J., & Sellers, C. (2019). Testing the validity of an internal power theory of interpersonal violence. Journal of Interpersonal Violence. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0886260519834092.

  • Walters, M. L., Chen, J., & Breiding, M. J. (2013). The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS): 2010 findings on victimization by sexual orientation. National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_sofindings.pdf.

  • Warshaw, C., Brashler, B., & Gil, J. (2009). Mental health consequences of intimate partner violence. In C. Mitchell & D. Anglin (Eds.), Intimate partner violence: A health based perspective (pp. 147–191). New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, M., & Daly, M. (1992). Till death us do part. In Homicide (pp. 83–98). New York: A. de Gruyter.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winick, B. J. (1997). The jurisprudence of therapeutic jurisprudence. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 3(1), 184–206.

    Google Scholar 

  • Xie, M., Lauritsen, J. L., & Heimer, K. (2012). Intimate partner violence in U.S. metropolitan areas: The contextual influences of police and social services. Criminology, 50(4), 961–992.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zeoli, A. M., Norris, A., & Brenner, H. (2011). A summary and analysis of warrantless arrest statutes for domestic violence in the United States. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 26(14), 2811–2833.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zorza, Z. (1992). The criminal law of misdemeanor violence, 1970–1990. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, 83(1), 46–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zorza, J. (1994). Woman battering: High costs and the state of the law [special issue]. Clearinghouse Review, 28, 383–395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zorza, J., & Woods, L. (1994). Analysis and policy implications of the new domestic violence police studies. Washington, DC: National Center on Women and Family Law.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Sociology, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA

    Shannon B. Harper

  2. School of Public Affairs, University of Colorado Denver, Denver, CO, USA

    Angela R. Gover

Authors
  1. Shannon B. Harper
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Angela R. Gover
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Angela R. Gover .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Institute on Violence, Abuse and Trauma, Alliant International University, San Diego, CA, USA

    Robert Geffner

  2. School of Health and Human Sciences, University of North Carolina at Greensbo, Greensboro, NC, USA

    Jacquelyn W. White

  3. Dept of Family and Community Medicine, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, USA

    L. Kevin Hamberger

  4. Department of Psychology, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, USA

    Alan Rosenbaum

  5. Ethelyn R. Strong School of Social Work, Norfolk State University, Norfolk, VA, USA

    Viola Vaughan-Eden

  6. Education and Research, Zero Abuse Project, St. Paul, MN, USA

    Victor I. Vieth

Section Editor information

  1. Consultant, Alexandria, VA, USA

    Glenna Tinney

  2. College of Arts and Sciences - Society, Culture, and Language, University of South Florida - St. Petersburg, St. Petersburg, Florida, USA

    Shelly M. Wagers

  3. University of North Carolina- Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, USA

    Jennifer Langhinrichsen-Rohling

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Harper, S.B., Gover, A.R. (2020). A Feminist Perspective on the Criminal Justice System Response to Domestic Violence. In: Geffner, R., White, J.W., Hamberger, L.K., Rosenbaum, A., Vaughan-Eden, V., Vieth, V.I. (eds) Handbook of Interpersonal Violence and Abuse Across the Lifespan. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62122-7_203-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-62122-7_203-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-62122-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-62122-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Behavioral Science and PsychologyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation