Specialization and the Use of GPS for Domestic Violence by Pretrial Programs: Findings from a National Survey of U.S. Practitioners

Abstract

Tools that facilitate the electronic monitoring of criminal justice populations are becoming widespread and multifaceted as they are adapted for a range of purposes and offender categories. In the past two decades, justice agencies across the United States have incorporated global positioning systems (GPS) to enforce no-contact orders in cases involving domestic violence (DV) or intimate partner violence (IPV). The current study surveyed a national (U.S.) sample of representatives (N ¼ 114) from agencies administering pretrial programs that use GPS following DV-related charges. While all respondents are involved in using GPS for DV, analysis shows that some also use a range of other tools and monitor diverse portfolios of offenders; we report on relationships between the number of technologies used, populations monitored, attitudes, and practices. The article discusses the importance of giving due attention to the role of specialization in remotely supervising clients and providing them with services.

The Effectiveness of Protection Orders in Reducing Recidivism in Domestic Violence: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

“…It may be that such offenders require more targeted and intensive treatments or surveillance in order to reduce reoffense. There is emerging evidence that electronic monitoring may be of use in combination with POs (Erez, Ibarra, Bales, & Gur, 2012; Gur, Ibarra, & Erez, 2016). However, evaluation research in this area confronts similar challenge to PO research where differing systems and concurrent interventions influence outcomes and make comparisons difficult.…”

Occupational Stress Associated With Technological Diversion Among Pretrial Services Officers: A Qualitative Case Study of GPS Supervision for Intimate Partner and Domestic Violence Cases

“…Maximizing the plausible diversionary benefits of GPS technology requires community corrections officers to navigate unique circumstances. While there is a growing body of literature on the effect of pretrial GPS supervision for IPV/DV cases (see, for example, Carter & Grommon, 2016;Erez et al, 2012Erez et al, , 2013Grommon et al, 2017;Gur et al, 2016;Ibarra & Erez, 2005;Ibarra et al, 2014), the range and nuance of stressors that community corrections professionals experience with pretrial GPS supervision represents an underdeveloped research area. The growth of pretrial service programs coupled with the pace of technological changes in GPS necessitates urgent examination of the experiences and staffing considerations of community corrections agencies using this technology.…”

Victim and Victim Support Staff Experiences of a Domestic Violence Electronic Monitoring Program in Australia

“…A collection of published works by a common group of authors spanning 2004 to 2016 have focused specifically on the implementation of EM for DV in the United States. (Erez & Ibarra, 2007;Erez et al, 2004Erez et al, , 2012Erez et al, , 2013Gur et al, 2016;Ibarra & Erez, 2005;Ibarra et al, 2014). The authors conducted in-depth surveys with 34 victims and 19 social service providers (Erez et al, 2012(Erez et al, , 2013, as well as a web-based survey completed by practitioners (N = 114) involved in delivering bilateral DV electronic monitoring programs in the United States (Gur et al, 2016).…”

“…(Erez & Ibarra, 2007;Erez et al, 2004Erez et al, , 2012Erez et al, , 2013Gur et al, 2016;Ibarra & Erez, 2005;Ibarra et al, 2014). The authors conducted in-depth surveys with 34 victims and 19 social service providers (Erez et al, 2012(Erez et al, , 2013, as well as a web-based survey completed by practitioners (N = 114) involved in delivering bilateral DV electronic monitoring programs in the United States (Gur et al, 2016). Key findings include that victims who were aware that the POI would be monitored, were confident of the technology and believed the program to be significantly beneficial to them.…”