A Few Notes on Battering & Stalking

Defining terms:

Battery:

“Woman battering” versus “Domestic violence”.

95% male perpetrated

Stalking:

Persistent pursuit of someone that instills fear in the target

Nature & Extent of Battering & Stalking

4 types of battering: –Physical–Sexual–Psychological–Destruction of property

Commonalities: –harm to the victim–results from domination & control–occur in a context of intimacy

Nature & Extent of Battering & Stalking

Estimates of the extent of Battery & Stalking are even more difficult to come by than data on rape & sexual assault.

Largely due to the same factors:

• Limited validity of official data (police reports, court records, etc.)

• Data quality is a function of–Sample characteristics–Questions employed–Limiting problems associated with surveys

Nature & Extent of Battering & StalkingA flavor of the data:• 85% of intimate partner violence involves women as victims (1998 NCVS)• 25-50% of all women will be victims of domestic battery at some point in their lives (from various sources)•Domestic violence is gendered

–Women are much more likely to be victims–Women’s likelihood of victimization increases as violence increases–Women vs Men

•Meaning or motive of DV–♀: retaliation ♂: control

•Responses to DV–♀: fear & hurt ♂: humor & anger

•Stalking is gendered–Much less common than battery (less than 10% of pop)–♀ roughly 3-4 times as likely to experience stalking victimization–♂ much more likely to be perpetrators of stalking (87% overall, & 60% even for ♂ victims)

The Process of Battering & Stalking

• Walker’s Cycle of Violence

• An explanation of Escalation

• 3 Stages:1. Tension-building

2. Acute battering incident

3. Making Up (kindness, contrition, loving behaviors)

Building a multi-causal understandingStructural Supports: Institutional Arrangements• Economy• Government & the Law

– Both encourage dependency of women on men– Lack of national and sufficient child care, welfare policy

Cultural Supports• The Role of Male Entitlement

– Violence as a means of control– The ability of men to get away with violence

• Women’s increased responsibility for successful relationships• Cultural scripts

Interpersonal Characteristics• Control & Jealousy by Batterers

– Assault as a tool to control• Psychological Trauma & dependency by victims

– Various theories attempt to explain why people accommodate (rather than resist) a dangerous/exploitive environment (prisoners of war)

Response: Domestic Disputes

• Police response:– Historically, has been an area of tremendous discretion.– Options:

• Arrest – not so common• Mediation• Separation (physical) – police power is limited• Referral – police power is limited • No action

• Factors influencing decision to arrest in domestic calls?– Severity of crime– Victim’s preference– Relationship– Suspect demeanor (hostility)

Response: Domestic Disputes

Factors influencing decision NOT to arrest?– Belief it is a private dispute– Officer judgment victim will not follow through– Legacy of past dept. perspective to avoid arrest– Arrest is work for officers

• Presents risks of injury• Creates higher visibility of officer actions

Response: Feminism impacts culture

1970s Revolution in DV cases: Mandatory Arrest• 1st attempts to control officer discretion through

policy• Resulted from efforts to limit police discretion in the

courts on the grounds that ♀ were not receiving equal protection of the law (14th Amendment)

• Police response should be guided by citizen behavior, not by the relationship of the parties involved

• Mandatory arrest policies based upon premise that arrest provides specific deterrence (criminalization of woman battering)

Discretion: Domestic Disputes• Does mandatory arrest deter future DV

– Minneapolis DV Experiment (Sherman and Berk 1982)• Examined deterrent effect of alternative actions on Domestic Violence

– Arrest, mediation, separation• Cases randomly assigned to each treatment• Findings: Arrests produced lower rates of repeat violence (in 6 mos.)• Resulted in widespread changes in policy toward mandatory arrest for

dom. Violence• Closer inspection revealed a number of flaws with the execution of the

experiment• Results have not been replicable in other cities

– In some cases arrest seems to have an escalation effect (“fighting fire w/gas”)• Why? Sample of recidivists

– Abuse is normative in relationship; Arrest is ineffective as a deterrent; disconnect between arrest and criminal sanctions; interaction effect with social capital (most effective on 1st timers and middle class)

– Preferred (pro) arrest has been adopted by most departments• Other provisions have been developed: training in handling domestic

situations

CJS ResponseCJS is composed of 3 parts: Cops, Courts & CorrectionsWhich is most important to addressing domestic battery?

What role do police play in the process of abusive domestic relationships?

Historically? Non-intervention (private dispute)Contemporary? Debatable3 Options: 1.Non-intervention, 2.Mediation, 3.ArrestMinneapolis DV experiment: Resulted in mandatory or pro-arrest

policies in DV cases (Controversial)Temporary Restraining OrdersPolice more likely to be batterers than population

evidence that up to 90% of domestic homicides are in HHs that police have already responded to a call for service.

Ch 21: Fear & the Perception of Alternatives-Browne

• If asking the question why battered women don’t leave is the wrong question to ask, what is/are the right question(s)?

• What is the relationship between the seriousness of battering events and the decision to leave an abusive relationship?

• How does familiarity between domestic combatants constrain women’s options?

• How has the law/CJS impacted battering situations? Is it a resource for batterer victims or batterers?

• What can we learn about the nature of lethal assaults by women from comparing the homicide and control groups?

• What is the process by which women turned from victim to offender?