The Importance of Prosecution Policies in Domestic Violence Cases

• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/1745-9133.12058
• Published date: 01 August 2013
• Date: 01 August 2013

POLICY ESSAY

VICTIM-CENTERED PROSECUTORIAL

POLICIES

The Importance of Prosecution Policies in

Domestic Violence Cases

Krista R. Flannigan

Florida State University

Traditionally,police and prosecutors have viewed battering as a private, family prob-

lem not appropriate for government intervention (Buzawa and Buzawa, 1996).

The criminal justice system seemed to shield abusive spouses from the public

in the belief that the parties should be left to work out their “differences” privately. If

any intervention was deemed appropriate, then counseling was preferred over prosecution

(McGuire, 1999).

In the 1970s, the women’smovement and resulting political pressure led to the creation

of more aggressive domestic violence laws such as mandatory arrest policies and hard line

investigation (Davis and Smith, 1995). By the 1980s, prosecutors in some jurisdictions had

initiated special programs for domestic violence cases (McGuire, 1999). In the decade after

the change in policy, the U.S. Department of Justice reported that the rate of violence by

intimate partners fell 42–49% (Bureau of Justice Statistics, 2013). These figures could be

read to suggest that systemic changes in the way the criminal justice system views domestic

violence have had a positive impact on this serious social problem (Fulkerson and Patterson,

2006).

Understanding of the impact of domestic violence on individual victims, families, and

communities has expanded greatly over the past 20 years (Hamel, 2013). A plethora of

research has been conducted on a variety of domestic violence issues, including physical

abuse; victimization; perpetration, risk factors, and risk assessment; emotional abuse and

control; abuse in ethnic minority and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT)

populations; impact of parental violence and conflict on children; impact of abuse on

partners; motives for abuse perpetration; retraining orders; prevention; victim services and

perpetrator treatment; the criminal justice response in the context of gender and ethnicity;

and the effectiveness of criminal justice sanctions (Hamel, 2013). Research results have

Direct correspondence to Krista R. Flannigan, Florida State University, College of Criminology and Criminal

Justice, 145 Convocation Way, Tallahassee, FL 32306 (e-mail: kflannigan@fsu.edu).

DOI:10.1111/1745-9133.12058 C2013 American Society of Criminology 481

Criminology & Public Policy rVolume 12 rIssue 3