NCJ Number
161524
Date Published
1996
Length
35 pages
Annotation
The author criticizes negative assessments of mandatory arrest in the context of domestic violence and the aim of the battered women's movement which is to prevent violence against women.
Abstract
Violence against women is a political fact, and understanding violence against women as a civil rights issue goes to the very heart of the abusive experience. Because control elements of battering are visible only in a negative way, coercive control gives a man far more power in the eyes of his mate than an outsider without expert knowledge of the situation can perceive. This is why risks inherent in abusive situations are consistently underestimated. Emphasizing cultural factors that make police agencies resist change neglects the fact that, prior to mandatory arrest, the police response to battering was no different from the response by doctors, judges, psychiatrists, and social workers. Coercive control is viewed as the proper framework for understanding male violence against women. Battering is discussed as a social phenomenon based on sexual inequality and coercive control. Criticisms of and reasons for supporting mandatory arrest as a way to prevent further violence are noted, and the importance of risk assessment in devising appropriate sanctions for violent offenders is examined. The author concludes that the entrapment associated with battering justifies a proactive response in anticipation of future assault and coercive control, that criminalization may or may not advance personal liberty and social justice, and that mandatory arrest of batterers represents a progressive redistribution of justice on behalf of women. 23 references and 12 notes