Controversies Surrounding Mandatory Arrest Policies and the Police Response to Intimate Partner Violence

Abstract

Since the early 1970s, the efforts of the battered women's movement have led to many changes in the criminal justice response to intimate partner violence (often referred to more broadly as ‘domestic violence’) in the USA. One important reform has been the implementation of policies that encourage or mandate the arrest of offenders. However, mandatory arrest policies have been hotly debated by scholars, activists, and criminal justice system officials. In this article, I review the recent changes to the ways in which police officers respond to intimate partner violence and discuss the controversies surrounding these changes in light of recent research. I briefly consider why the literature on this topic has produced such contradictory findings and I discuss several actions that need to be taken in order to improve police response to intimate partner violence and better meet the needs of battered women.

“Whoa! They Could’ve Arrested Me!”: Unsuccessful Identity Claims of Women During Police Response to Intimate Partner Violence

“…As Leisenring (2008) demonstrates, the vast majority of existing studies that examine police response to IPV in the context of mandatory arrest policies focus on the ways in which these policies impact men's and women's arrest rates and the likelihood of abusers to re-offend. There exists a fair amount of evidence demonstrating that women's arrest rates have increased under these policies but we have few detailed accounts about what actually transpires in situations where women are arrested.…”

“…Historically police officers commonly refused to arrest abusers even if there was clear evidence of victimization and arrest was what the victim desired (Belknap 2001). Largely as a response to pressure from feminists and battered women's advocates, in the last several decades many jurisdictions have implemented mandatory arrest policies that require officers to arrest an offender if there is probable cause to believe that an act of violence has occurred (Leisenring 2008). These policies were primarily enacted in order to remove discretion from the responding officers so as to ensure the arrest of offenders and serve as a deterrent for future violence (Frye et al 2007).…”

Victims’ Perceptions of Police Response to Intimate Partner Violence

“…Mandatory arrest policies have been the most controversial, and, as previously discussed, there is much disagreement about whether they are effective and/or appropriate. Not only is there debate about who should decide what happens during police response to IPV, but there are also questions surrounding the degree to which these policies affect offenders' behaviors, and whether or not they are in victims' best interests (see Leisenring, 2008 for further discussion).…”

“…Further, studies show that not all victimized women support aggressive arrest policies (Bohmer, Brandt, Bronson, & Hartnett, 2002;A. Smith, 2001) and that some have negative perceptions of police officers and their actions during response to IPV calls (Leisenring, 2008;Rajah, Frye, & Haviland, 2006;Stephens & Sinden, 2000). Finally, there exists evidence that, for a number of reasons, many police officers dislike responding to IPV calls and often become frustrated in their work with these cases (DeJong, Burgess-Proctor, & Elis, 2008; R. R. Johnson, 2004;Sinden & Stephens, 1999).…”

“…There has been ongoing debate among victim's advocates, feminists, researchers, and law enforcement officials as to whether a more aggressive approach to policing IPV is in victims' best interests (Dasgupta, 2003;Jones & Belknap, 1999;Leisenring, 2008;Stark, 2004). The findings of some studies call into question the deterrent effect of arrest on offenders' behaviors (Schmidt & Sherman, 1996;Simpson, Bouffard, Garner, & Hickman, 2006).…”