Surviving Times of Austerity: Preserving the Specialist Domestic Violence Court Provision

Evidencing domestic violence*, including behaviour that falls under the new offence of ‘controlling or coercive behaviour’

“…15 Before the creation of s. 76 efforts had been made to encourage victim participation in the trial process, the partial success of which are evidenced by a reduction in the high victim withdrawal rate and an increase in convictions (Crown Prosecution Service, 2015). Specialist Domestic Violence Courts, located within the magistrates' court (see Bettinson, 2016;Cook et al, 2004;Vallely, 2005), and Independent Domestic Violence Advocates (IDVAs), where available, provide a victim-centred court 14. 'Over 7,500 domestic violence cases failed to attend court or retracted their evidence; that is 1 in 3 of all failed cases.…”

“…The Home Office definition of controlling behaviour is found at https://www.gov.uk/guidance/domestic-violence-andabuse 36. Further analysis of these terms are discussed elsewhere (Bettinson, 2016;Bettinson and Bishop, 2015;Bishop, 2016 37. As discussed above in part 1.…”

Specialist domestic violence courts for child arrangement cases:safer courtrooms and safer outcomes?

“…It was closely followed by specialist courts in Cardiff, West London, Wolverhampton and Derby. The history of SDVCs is one of rapid expansion in the criminal justice system around the turn of the last century, followed by more recent contraction due to the magistrates' court closure programme and resourcing issues (Bettinson, 2016). SDVCs are now sometimes referred to as specialist domestic abuse courts (SDACs) to reflect the broader definition of domestic violence, which includes non-physical abuse in addition to physical violence.…”

“…This was not ideal given that Cook et al (2004, p. 82) noted that lay advocates were seen by the victim and criminal justice agencies 'as the trusted links into the system' and that victims felt more confident in attending the SDVC with the support of an IDVA. As Bettinson (2016) has more recently observed, the IDVA is central to a 'victim-centred court', yet identifying and maintaining a funding stream for IDVAs has always been an issue. She concludes that 'it is essential that austerity cuts do not remove the IDVA's presence from the legal process' (Bettinson, 2016, p. 89); a conclusion which is supported by the first five courts evaluation and also by the evaluation of the SDVC pilots at Croydon and Gwent (Vallely et al, 2005).…”

“…A snapshot review of SDVCs in 2013 noted that 'There is evidence that courts are being made to feel safer for victims of domestic violence' (New Economics Foundation, 2014) However, the report observed that, although the majority of those surveyed thought special measures were being effectively provided, a significant minority did not and commented that the process of obtaining special measures was too 'laborious'. Bettinson (2016), who carried out her own small scale empirical study of an SDVC, highlights the potential impact of magistrates' court closures on the provision of safe court facilities for victims of domestic abuse. Commenting on the court closure programme, she notes that the Ministry of Justice has maintained a commitment to providing alternative venues for magistrates' courts, possibly using other civic buildings.…”