The Phenomenon of Domestic Violence, Essay Example

The phenomenon of domestic violence, a grave societal problem and a crime, has been researched substantially during the last decades. Scientists study the problems of violence escalation, stages of violence, risk factors for abuse and re-abuse. One more trend in the researches concerns the validation of legal methods, namely protective orders (or restraining orders) to protect victims from abusers.

 The article “Protective Orders and Domestic Violence: Risk Factors for Re-Abuse” by Matthew J. Carlson, Susan D. Harris, and George W. Holden investigates the value of the civil Protective Order (PO) as a method of combating domestic violence. The object of study is an assessment of re-abuse risks concerning women who have gained the PO, thought the legal system of the USA provides defense for dating partners, same-sex couples, former spouses, children, family members,  people supporting the victim.

In the introduction, the authors justify the topicality of the problem appealing to the limited number of works aimed at the study of PO effectiveness and the role they play in recurrence of violent actions. Special attention is paid to the risk factors of re-abuse. The scientists emphasize that earlier studies provide some assessment of the risk factors: sharing a biological child with offender, earlier arrest of the offender, prior domestic violence. The current study integrates the existing knowledge and adds new risk factors (like socioeconomic status, ethnic factor) to the assessment of the likelihood of re-abuse concerning the women who have received POs. The significance of SES has been proved by the statistics provided by the statistics.

The scientists focus on the re-abuse risks on the basis of profound analysis of preceding relevant works and statistic data from the Travis County (Texas) courthouse and police reports from the Austin Police Department (APD). It bases on a longer time tract (1990 -1992), in comparison with prior studies. The work has a well-developed structure comprising several chapters and subchapters. “Assessing The Risk of Re-Abuse” studies socioeconomic status, intervention and family characteristics. The authors examine the theoretical basis and declare several hypotheses:

– women with higher socioeconomic status should be less likely to assert re-abuse with a protective order issued than their lower SES counterparts;

– “women who filed permanent protective orders should be more likely to experience relief than women who filed only temporary orders of protection” (Carlson, Harris, Holden, 1999, p. 209);

– relationship length, presence of children should decrease the probability of re-abuse.

The “Method” chapter explicates the technique of data collection, classifying, the measures conducted. The analysis, further grouping, and assessment take into account the following variables: age, race, SES of the victim, length of relationship, presence of children, earlier arrests, temporary or permanent PO type. The data of   210 cases of reported violence were thoroughly structured on the basis of the named variables. The tables examine the number of reports before and after filing PO, regression of future violent actions, regression of violence rates within a SES.

Therefore, deep analysis and calculations lead to warranted conclusions. The PO is indeed efficient in reducing the abuse of many women. Thus, family characteristics and domestic factor should be taken into consideration, because the research proves that with PO issued about ¼ of women suffered repeatedly.

The article is applicable for further research of domestic violence from the standpoint of factors having an impact on the likelihood of re-abuse and statistics in the branch. The influential study Domestic Violence: The Criminal Justice Report  by Buzawa and Buzawa (2003) refers to statistics from the present article to claim the necessity of restraining orders: “There is virtually no disagreement that domestic violence victims need protective orders”(Buzawa & Buzawa, 2003). Within the bounds of restraining orders discussion, the survey “Protective Orders in Texas” by Kercher and Rufino (2008) refers to the article’s statistics. Kercher and Rufino exemplify discrepant figures of protective orders efficiency.        They resort to the article as one of many ambiguous of approaches to effectiveness assessment (2008).

The statistics generalizes the data scrupulously on the ground of detailed measurements, logical variables and substantial explication of results. The results partially justify the effectiveness of the PO as a tool of a legal defense from offending actions, namely deterrence from recidivism. Nevertheless, it is difficult to obtain comprehensive figures in data-collecting. The authors drew the conclusion on the basis of reported facts. According to Summers and Hoffman (2002), the specificity of the aforementioned phenomenon is the difficulty in precise measuring (Summers & Hoffman, 2002). They insist that data on the incidence of violence is incomplete due to under-reported cases of physical assault. Many victims do not file PO being afraid of future retaliation or public intervention.

Thus, the authors acknowledge this limitation of the work related to the reliance on police reports as the main indicators of domestic violence and PO effectiveness. On the other hand, Carlson, Harris, and Holden (1999) emphasize the reliability of police records for several reasons, among which are casual and not bias factors in reports of violence. Moreover, the limitation of the work suggests directions for future research (Carlson, Harris, & Holden, 1999).

Thereby, the article provides profound research based on the statistics, substantially structured and analyzed. The authors develop straight and logical line of reasoning.  Though the authors claim several limitations in the work, these drawbacks are identified primarily by the specificity of the problem and difficulties in measuring.

References

Buzawa, E., & Buzawa, C. (2003). Domestic Violence: The Criminal Justice Response. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Carlson, M. J., Harris, S. D., & Holden, G. W. (1999, June). Protective orders and domestic violence: Risk factors for re-abuse. Journal of Family Violence,14 (2), 177 -191.

Kercher, G., Rufino, K. (2008, June). Protective orders in Texas. Huntsville, Texas: The Crime Victims’ Institute, Sam Houston State University, Criminal Justice Center.

Summers, R.W., Hoffman M.A. (2002). United States. In R. W. Summers, A. M. Hoffman (Ed.), Domestic violence: a global view (pp. 169 -195). Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group.