The Evolution of Domestic Violence Policy Through Masculine Institutions: From Discipline to Protection to Collaborative Empowerment

Gender, race, and formal court decision-making outcomes: Chivalry/paternalism, conflict theory or gender conflict?

“…More specifically, the current analysis found that the influence of offender and victim gender on sentence length outcomes was statistically significant and that male offenders who targeted female victims received the most severe sanctions when compared to any of the other offender/victim gender dyads. This finding supports existing research (e.g., Glaeser & Sacerdote, 2003) suggesting that females are most deserving of protection in terms of the criminal justice systems' responsibility as a gendered institution to punish offenders who target women as victims of violent crime (see Lutze & Symons, 2003 for a related discussion). Further, the current research provided support for the idea that the criminal justice system acts as a mechanism to punish individual men who fall outside of their prescribed role as protectors and defenders of women who are inherently weak, vulnerable, and in need of help and protection.…”

“…According to the chivalry/paternalism hypotheses, the criminal justice system is expected to sanction offenders who victimize women more harshly than offenders who victimize men. This captures: (1) the system's responsibility as a gendered institution for protecting women who are inherently unable to help and protect themselves and thus, are in need of help/protection (see Lutze & Symons, 2003 for a related discussion), and (2) the system's role in punishing individual men who fall outside of their prescribed role as the protectors and defenders of women who are inherently weak and in need of male protection.…”

Police-probation partnerships: Professional identity and the sharing of coercive power

“…This move toward inter-agency collaboration is becoming popular in many criminal justice domains such as drug courts, day reporting centers, domestic violence consortiums, community oriented policing, militarized policing, and community corrections (see Butts & Roman, 2005;Clear & Cadora, 2003;Kraska, 2001;Lutze & Symons, 2003;Petersilia, 2003). Although many experts are advocating open collaborative working relationships to better serve justice involved populations (victims, offenders, and communities), there has been little attention given to how these relationships may alter the working roles of those involved or the clientele served by multiple agencies.…”

The Impact of Officer and Agency Characteristics on the Likelihood of Arrest in Domestic Violence Situations among Rural Law Enforcement Officers

“…Additionally, victim's advocacy groups have only recently gained the political clout to push for mandatory arrest policies. Many of these officers, particularly those who are educated, would be trained both by the department and in a higher education environment during a time as Lutze and Symons (2003) argued where social service and criminal justice agencies are more inclined to work collaboratively as opposed to the past where the agencies operated independently. Younger officers may be more aware of their existence and purpose and more willing to use these organizations than older officers who may be ingrained in the old style of training where officers were trained to believe that a domestic violence situation is a personal matter between two parties that should be handled privately.…”