Understanding the Context of Dual Arrest With Directions for Future Research

Hirschel, J. David; Buzawa, Eve S.

doi:10.1177/107780102237965

Cited by 120 publications

(139 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

138

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…While the increase in men arrested for domestic violence was expected, women experienced a disproportionately greater increase of arrests, and women now represent approximately 20% of the arrests related to intimate partners in the United States (Durose et al 2005;Hirschel and Buzawa 2002). However, less than 10% of women arrested for domestic violence are thought to involve women as primary aggressors (Renauer and Henning 2005;Swan and Snow 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

“…The vast majority of women arrested for domestic violence therefore represent victims of domestic violence. Arresting victims for domestic violence has a number of serious negative consequences, including disempowerment, losing custody of children, and revictimization (Das Dasgupta 2002;Hirschel and Buzawa 2002;McMahon and Pence 2003;Miller and Meloy 2006;Mills 1998;Osthoff 2002;Rajah et al 2006). Concern is growing over whether policies such as mandatory arrest actually increase safety for women (Goodman and Epstein 2005).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Sequence and Timing of Three Community Interventions to Domestic Violence

Hovmand

Ford

2009

American J of Comm Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community responses to domestic violence typically involve the introduction of multiple interventions. Yet very little is known about the impact of the timing and sequencing of these interventions on community outcomes. A reason for this is the inherent limitations of traditional methods in social science. New methods are needed to understand the effect of varying the sequence and timing of interventions. This study responds to the issue by introducing system dynamics as a method for modeling community interventions. The paper presents a model of domestic violence cases moving through a criminal justice response, and uses the simulation model to evaluate the impact of implementing three interventions-mandatory arrest, victim advocacy, and changes in level of cooperation-on two system-level outcomes: improving offender accountability and increasing victim safety. Results illustrate the complex nature of these relationships. Implications for community practice and future research are also discussed.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Sequence and Timing of Three Community Interventions to Domestic Violence

Hovmand

Ford

2009

American J of Comm Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Pressure placed on the criminal justice system catalyzed efforts to generate policy responses that addressed these public concerns. The encouraging, but methodologically controversial findings from Sherman and Berk's (1984) IPV field experiment with the Minneapolis police department galvanized policy-makers to grant authorities more latitude in making IPV arrests (Hirschel & Buzawa;Miller 2001). As a result, the nationwide implementation of proarrest statutes for IPV perpetration was widely supported, and warrantless arrest was considered the "preferred police response" (Hirschel & Buzawa, p. 1451).…”

mentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Female IPV victims' involvement with the justice system occurs primarily because of communities' proarrest statutes for IPV perpetration (DeLeon-Granados et al 2006;Hirschel and Buzawa 2002). Once involved with the justice system, judges might mandate IPV victims to participate in community-based services (Hamberger and Potente 1994;Kernsmith and Kernsmith 2009;Miller 2001).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The problem of IPV was brought to the forefront of public awareness during the 1970s when demands by women's groups for stringent arrest policies converged with litigation alleging that local authorities had been negligent in responding to IPV incidents (Hirschel and Buzawa 2002). Pressure placed on the criminal justice system catalyzed efforts to generate policy responses that addressed these public concerns.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Innovative Program for Justice-Involved Partner Violence Victims: “No Man is Worth Me Getting Locked Up”

2012

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Violence victims who are the primary caregivers for their children sometimes become justice-involved through efforts to protect and defend against intimate partner violence (IPV). Judges often mandate these victims to community-based services, although little is known about these services. Given increasing numbers of such victims, two human service agencies collaborated to create a program for female IPV victims who were their children's primary caregivers and who were mandated to services for violence against a male partner. Our research team conducted a feasibility study of the program using an exploratory qualitative study design to collect data from program participants (n018) and providers (n07). Analyses determined three key findings: (a) the importance of a welcoming, comfortable environment; (b) the value of certain aspects of the program content; and (c) the importance of support from like others for participant improvement. These findings point to indispensable program elements. Implications for other communities and providers serving justice-involved IPV victims who are also primary caregivers are described.Intimate partner violence (IPV) between heterosexual partners affects a considerable number of women each year in the United States. According to census-based population projections, more than a million women each year and upward of 21 million women in their lifetimes will be victimized by a current or former spouse or cohabitating partner (Tjaden and Thoennes 2000a, b). Unfortunately, women who are victimized by IPV can also become involved with the justice system and subjected to legal sanctions as a result of their IPV experiences (Hamberger and Potente 1994;Miller 2001;Rajan and McCloskey 2007). The phrase justice-involved IPV victims is used here to describe this population of women who have experienced IPV victimization and have also been arrested for IPV perpetration. In this study, we particularly focused on female, justice-involved IPV victims who are the primary caregivers for their children. In other words, the program research participants were women who were: (a) principally victims of IPV; (b) identified as perpetrators by the justice system; and (c) mothers, grandmothers, or stepmothers who were the primary caregivers for their children, grandchildren, or stepchildren respectively.

show abstract

Domestic Violence

Carmody¹

2007

The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Domestic violence is a pattern of coercive behavior designed to exert power and control over a person in an intimate relationship through the use of intimidating, threatening, harmful, or harassing behavior (Dutton 1995). This rather broad definition includes multiple forms of abuse: physical, sexual, and emotional or psychological. There is a lack of agreement about what should be included in the definition of domestic violence. Some argue for a broad definition that includes sexual and emotional harm, like the one above, while others limit their definition to actions that result in physical injury.

show abstract

Understanding the Context of Dual Arrest With Directions for Future Research

Cited by 120 publications

References 34 publications

Sequence and Timing of Three Community Interventions to Domestic Violence

Sequence and Timing of Three Community Interventions to Domestic Violence

An Innovative Program for Justice-Involved Partner Violence Victims: “No Man is Worth Me Getting Locked Up”

Domestic Violence

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About