Domestic/Family Violence Death Reviews

Abstract

Domestic/Family Violence Death Reviews (D/FVDRs) have been established in a number of high-income countries since 1990 as a mechanism to inform prevention-focused interventions to reduce domestic/family violence. D/FVDRs differ in their structure, governance, case identification processes and inclusion criteria, review measures, and outputs. Outside of the United States, the extent of heterogeneity across and within countries has not been explored. This study comprised an international comparison of D/FVDRs and their core elements to inform the establishment of D/FVDRs in other developed countries, and potentially low- and middle-income countries where violence is a leading cause of death. Such a review is also a necessary foundation for any future evaluation D/FVDRs. The review identified 71 jurisdictions where a D/FVDRs had been established in the past two decades, 25 of which met the inclusion criteria. All D/FVDRs examined stated a reduction in deaths as a goal of the review process; however, none reported an actual reduction. The focus of the D/FVDRs examined was on intimate partner homicides; however, more recently established D/FVDRs include other familial relationships. Almost one third of the D/FVDRs examined reported changes to the domestic/family system that occurred as a result of recommendations made from the review process. While similar in many ways, D/FVDRs differ along a number of important dimensions that make it difficult to identify best practices for jurisdictions considering the establishment of such an initiative. To share knowledge, existing networks should be expanded nationally and internationally to include jurisdictions that may be considering this initiative.

Preventing Violence: A Public Health Participatory Approach to Homicide Reviews

“…As noted by Storer et al (2013) and Bugeja et al (2015), translating fatality review group recommendations into action is a particularly challenging area. While the PHRG was able to address select areas, future fatality review groups should acknowledge the costs associated with translating findings into practice and should take steps to facilitate timely implementation of recommendations.…”

“…Finally, our singular focus on the City of Pittsburgh, without including all homicides in the county (roughly a similar number), precluded us from building connections among incidents that cross city and county boundaries. As noted by Storer et al (2013) and Bugeja et al (2015), translating fatality review group recommendations into action is a particularly challenging area. While the PHRG was able to address select areas, future fatality review groups should acknowledge the costs associated with translating findings into practice and should take steps to facilitate timely implementation of recommendations.…”

“…Evidence of how results from death reviews can be translated into practice is just now appearing in published literature. For example, Bugeja, Dawson, McIntyre, and Walsh’s (2015) review highlights the problems of evaluating the long-term impact of domestic/family violence death reviews and recommends practice-oriented focus on “strengthening the domestic/family violence service system can become a more concrete focus of research to examine the development, uptake, and success of recommendations made by [fatality reviews] over a period of time” (Bugeja et al, 2015, p. 185). Additional work by Storer et al (2013) also recommend a focus on service partnerships and community mobilization.…”

Navigating Family Involvement in Domestic Violence Fatality Review: Conceptualising Prospects for Systems and Relational Repair

“…Beginning in the United States, DVFR systems have since been established in a number of high-income countries including Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and Portugal, as well as England and Wales (where they are known as Domestic Homicide Reviews (DHRs) . Comparisons of these different DVFR processes show differences reflecting the jurisdictional mandate for and manner of establishment and governance, the cases considered, operation, and reporting (Bugeja et. al., 2015).…”

Intersectionality and Invisible Victims: Reflections on Data Challenges and Vicarious Trauma in Femicide, Family and Intimate Partner Homicide Research

“…1 Although there are considerable differences between these approaches, in different ways they offer an unflinching review of a homicide, an opportunity to honour those who have died, and to be clear about perpetrator accountability, as well as reflect on our own individual, community and social understandings and responses. The promise is that by better understanding these deaths, we can identify learning and, consequently, improve professional and systems responses, as well as take other broader actions to bring about social and transformative change, including community education and awareness (Bugeja et al 2015). To deliver that promise, research initiatives must be based on data which fully captures the nuances, and contextualises the events leading to the death.…”