The Agencies of Abuse: Intimate Abusers' Experience of Presumptive Arrest and Prosecution

Abstract

Presumptive arrest and prosecution policies are designed to eradicate domestic violence by disrupting abusive relationships and transforming the subjectivities of victimized women and abusive men. Using in-depth interviews with 30 persons arrested and prosecuted for domestic violence, this article examines the power of presumptive policies by exploring how intimate abusers experience them. The study finds that while the police and courts are able to secure arrests and convictions on domestic violence cases, nearly all the respondents in this study understand their punishments as unfair sanctions meted out by an unjust local legal system rather than as the consequences of their own actions. These injustice claims emerge from abusers' group identities as well as the very practices through which the police and courts gain authority over them. These findings demonstrate that the power of the law as a force for social change may be more limited than some have claimed. In addition, they reinforce calls to reform society's response to intimate violence through procedures that can go further in empowering victims and having offenders recognize their responsibility for violence.

The Intimate Partner Violence Responsibility Attribution Scale (IPVRAS)

“…As expected, responsibility attribution to legal system was inversely correlated with satisfaction with the legal system. A large proportion of IPVAW offenders participating in community-based intervention programs do not consider the behavior which cause their conviction to be a crime and define their own behavior in intimate relationships as "normal" or "acceptable" (Cattlet et al, 2010;Guzik, 2008;Scott & Strauss). This would explain why they consider their conviction and the law unfair; since, in their opinion, they punish a "normal" male behavior (see Cattlet et al, 2010, for a qualitative analysis).…”

“…(4) To test the IPVRAS criterion-related validity, we will use several measures of variables that theoretically are expected to be related to each of the sources of causal attribution assessed in this scale. We expect that responsibility attribution to the legal system will be inversely related to the satisfaction with the legal system (Guzik, 2008). In relation to the responsibility attribution to the victim, we expect it to be positively related to general attitudes of victim blaming in cases of domestic violence (Klein, Campbell, Soler, & Ghez, 1997;Gracia, Herrero, Lila, & Fuente, 2009) and to sexist attitudes (Glick & Fiske, 1996;Glick, Sakalli-Ugurlu, Ferreira, & de Souza, 2002;Lila et al, 2012).…”

Rural Australian Women’s Legal Help Seeking for Intimate Partner Violence

“…Universal arrest policies not only fail to account for the socially complex reasons why IPV victims seek formal intervention, they also result in other problems (Hoyle & Sanders, 2000). Although introducing specialist DV police may mitigate the severity of legalese for victims, a CJS approach risks offenders taking responsibility for their abusive behavior by shifting blame to "the system," an overly penal State, for targeting them (Guzik, 2008;Yates, Pillai, & Berry, 2008). Although introducing specialist DV police may mitigate the severity of legalese for victims, a CJS approach risks offenders taking responsibility for their abusive behavior by shifting blame to "the system," an overly penal State, for targeting them (Guzik, 2008;Yates, Pillai, & Berry, 2008).…”

More Than a Piece of Paper? Protection Orders as a Resource for Battered Women

“…This theory suggests that if citizens view legal processes and procedures as fair, both positive and negative legal outcomes will be viewed as acceptable. Prior research has examined the role of procedural justice in domestic violence cases from the perspective of the batterer (Guzik 2008, 2009; Paternoster et al. 1997).…”

“…1997). For instance, Guzik (2008, 2009) examined how batterers perceived the legal system, particularly its legitimacy. Consistent with a procedural justice perspective, those batterers who felt respected by legal system actors also perceived the system as more legitimate.…”