The proliferation of coercive prosecution policies toward victims of domestic violence is premised on the notion that prosecution protects victims. However noble this criminal justice ideology, it is largely untested and may reflect an interest in defining prosecution for its practitioners rather than using prosecution on behalf of victims. This article examines recent coercive policies in light of both differing views on the prosecutorial role of victims and extant research evidence on the protective impact of mandatory prosecution.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Cahn, N. (1992). Innovative approaches to the prosecution of domestic violence crimes: An overview. In E. S. Buzawa & C. G. Buzawa (Eds.), Domestic violence: The changing criminal justice response (pp. 161-180). Westport, CT: Auburn House.
2.
Child Abuse, Domestic Violence, Adoption, and Family Services Act, 42 U.S.C. § 10415 (1992).
3.
Davis, R. C., Smith, B. E., & Nickles, L. (1997). Prosecuting domestic violence cases with reluctant victims: Assessing two novel approaches in Milwaukee (Final report submitted to the National Institute of Justice). Washington, DC: American Bar Association.
4.
Davis, R. C., Taylor, B. G., & Maxwell, C. D. (2000). Does batterer treatment reduce violence? A randomized experiment in Brooklyn. New York: Victim Services Research.
5.
Dunford, F. W. (2000). The San Diego Navy Experiment: An assessment of interventions for men who assault their wives. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 68, 468-476.
6.
Elliott, C., Giddings, L., & Jacobson, A. (1985, Summer). Against no-drop policies. NCADV Voice, p. 3.
7.
Erez, E., & Belknap, J. (1998). In their own words: Battered women's assessment of the criminal processing system's responses. Violence and Victims, 13, 251-268.
8.
Feder, L., & Forde, D. R. (2000). A test of the efficacy of court-mandated counseling for domestic violence offenders: The Broward experiment. (Final report submitted to the National Institute of Justice). Memphis, TN: University of Memphis, Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice.
9.
Feeley, M. (1979). The process is the punishment: Handling cases in a lower criminal court. New York: Russell Sage.
10.
Ferraro, K. J. (1989). Policing woman battering. Social Problems, 36, 61-74.
11.
Ford, D. A. (1983). Wife battery and criminal justice: A study of victim decision-making. Family Relations, 32, 463-475.
12.
Ford, D. A. (1991a). Preventing and provoking wife battery through criminal sanctions: A look at the risks. In D. D. Knudsen & J. L. Miller (Eds.), Abused and battered: Social and legal responses to family violence (pp. 191-209). New York: Aldine.
13.
Ford, D. A. (1991b). Prosecution as a victim power resource: A note on empowering women in violent conjugal relationships. Law & Society Review, 25, 313-334.
14.
Ford, D. A. (1993). The Indianapolis Domestic Violence Prosecution Experiment (Final report submitted to the National Institute of Justice). Indianapolis: Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis, Department of Sociology.
15.
Ford, D. A., & Burke, M. J. (1987, July). Victim initiated criminal complaints for wife battery: An assessment of motives. Paper presented at the Third National Conference for Family Violence Researchers, University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH.
16.
Goldkamp, J. S. (1996). The role of drug and alcohol abuse in domestic violence and its treatment: Dade County's Domestic Violence Court Experiment (Final report submitted to the National Institute of Justice). Philadelphia: Crime and Justice Research Institute.
17.
Gondolf, E. W. (2000). A 30-month follow-up of court-referred batterers in four cities. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 44, 111-128.
18.
Harrell, A. (1991). Evaluation of court-ordered treatment for domestic violence offenders (Final report submitted to the State Justice Institute). Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
19.
Hart, B. J. (1998). Safety and accountability: The underpinnings of a just justice system. Harrisburg: Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence.
20.
Healey, K., & Smith, C. (1998). Batterer intervention: Program approaches and criminal justice strategies (NCJ 168638). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
21.
Holtzworth-Munroe, A., & Stuart, G. L. (1994). Typologies of male batterers: Three subtypes and the differences among them. Psychological Bulletin, 116, 476-497.
Lautenberg Amendment to the Gun Control Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9) (1996).
24.
Maxwell, C. D., Garner, J. H., & Fagan, J. A. (2001). Effects of arrest on intimate partner violence: New evidence from the Spouse Assault Replication Program (NCJ 188199). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice.
25.
Mills, L. G. (1997). Intuition and insight: A new job description for the battered woman's prosecutor and other more modest proposals. UCLA Women's Law Journal, 7, 183-199.
26.
Mills, L. G. (1998). Mandatory arrest and prosecution policies for domestic violence: A critical literature review and the case for more research to test victim empowerment approaches. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 25, 306-318.
27.
Purdy, F. (1985, Summer). Pro-no-drop policy. NCADV Voice, pp. 3-4.
28.
Rebovich, D. J. (1996). Prosecution responses to domestic violence: Results of a survey of large jurisdictions. In E. S. Buzawa & C. G. Buzawa (Eds.), Do arrests and restraining orders work? (pp. 176-191). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
29.
Rose, M. (Panelist). (1996). When the cry comes (National Domestic Violence Teleconference). Columbia: South Carolina ETV.
30.
Smith, B. E., Davis, R., Nickles, L. B., & Davies, H. J. (2001). Evaluation of efforts to implement no-drop policies: Two central values in conflict (Final report submitted to the National Institute of Justice). Washington, DC: American Bar Association.
31.
Surbeck, J. F., Jr., Archer, J., Hannaford, D., Lewis, S., & Beams, J. M. (1996). San Diego: Report of domestic violence site team. Allen County, Indiana: Allen County Domestic Violence Focus Group.
32.
Walker, S. (1994). Sense and nonsense about crime and drugs. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
33.
Wills, D. (1997). Domestic violence: The case for aggressive prosecution. UCLA Women's Law Journal, 7, 173-182.
