The Battered Woman Syndrome and the Admissibility of Expert Testimony in Utah
| Publication year | 1992 |
| Pages | 16 |
| Citation | Vol. 5 No. 3 Pg. 16 |
Hugh Joel Breyer, J.
I. Introduction
Recently, abused women on trial for the murder of their abusive spouse or boyfriend, have sought to introduce expert testimony on the "battered woman syndrome" in support of their claim of self-defense. The majority of the courts which have been faced with this issue have admitted the expert testimony. Several other courts, however, have refused to recognize the reliability of the battered woman syndrome, and have not allowed expert testimony on the battered woman syndrome to be admitted. Still other courts, including Utah's, have yet to rule on the issue.
This article will first examine the "battered woman syndrome, " its underlying theories, and its relation to a battered woman's claim of self-defense. Next, I will address the use of expert testimony and the admission of battered woman syndrome evidence in Utah to support self defense claims. Finally, I will look at the case law on the question of the admissibility of expert testimony on the "battered woman syndrome."
II. The Battered Woman/Wife Syndrome
A battered woman is defined by Dr. Lenore Walker, a psychologist who has done extensive research on the battered woman syndrome, as a woman who is repeatedly subjected to any forceful physical or psychological behavior by a man in order to coerce her to do something he wants her to do without concern for her rights.[1] The following characteristics are common to battered women: they believe all the myths about battering relationships; strongly believe in family unity; suffer guilt, yet deny the terror and anger they feel; present a passive face to the world but have the strength to manipulate their environment enough to prevent further violence and being killed; have severe stress reactions, with psychophysiological complaints; use sex as a way to establish intimacy: and believe that no one will be able to help them resolve their predicament except themselves.[2] Battered women include wives or women in any form of intimate relationship with men. Battered women are socialized to accept a traditional male/female distinction. They tend to have an extraordinary dependence on men, a trait probably developed before they entered the battering relationship. They also suffer from low self-esteem, which causes them to doubt their ability to succeed as wives. Verbal abuse usually accompanies the beatings and contributes to their belief that they must be doing something wrong to cause their mates to beat them.[3]
Prior to studies on battered women, courts relied on popular myths to explain the behavior and motivations of battered women. Such myths included: (1) battered women are masochistic; (2) battered women are crazy; (3) religious beliefs will prevent battering; (4) battered women are uneducated and have few job skills; (5) drinking causes battering; (6) police can protect the battered woman; (7) longstanding battering relationships can change for the better; (8) battered women like beatings, and/or deserve to be beaten: (9) battered women are free to leave such relationships if they so desired; (10) the violence fulfills a deep-seated need within each partner.[4]
The "battered woman syndrome, " not itself a defense, serves to explain why a battered woman perceives herself in imminent danger, and why she kills her batterer in "self-defense." The "battered woman syndrome" is a psychosocial theory that identifies characteristics ' common to women victimized in abusive relationships. It explains their psychological inability to terminate the relationship and rebuts the myths.[5]
III. Theories to Explain the Battered Woman Syndrome
A. Learned Helplessness
Learned helplessness is one psychological theory developed to explain the "battered woman syndrome." There are three components which comprise the learned helplessness theory: (1) information about what will happen; (2) thinking or cognitive representation about what will happen (learning, expectation, belief, perception); and (3) behavior toward what does happen. It is the second or cognitive representation component where the faulty expectation that response and outcome are independent occurs. It is important to realize that the expectation may or may not be accurate. Thus, if the person does have control over response-outcome variables, but believes she/he doesn't, the person responds with the learned helplessness phenomenon.[6]
Learned helplessness was first tested by an experimental psychologist named Martin Seligman "in laboratory experiments, in which dogs where taught that their behavior did not make a difference whether or not they received electric shocks. The dogs' perceptions that there was no contingent relationship between their responses and the outcomes caused distortions in the behavior."[7] Instead of trying to escape, as they had in the beginning of the shock treatment, the dogs became compliant, passive and submissive, and ceased any voluntary activity.[8] Later when the dogs' cages were opened, the dogs "remained passive, refused to leave and did not avoid the shock."[9] Other animals have reacted in a similar fashion when subject to experiments like Seligman's.
Dr. Walker theorizes that battered women suffer from the same psychological condition that Seligman's dogs did, learned helplessness. The continuous beatings an abused woman is subject to, like electrical shocks, diminish the woman's motivation to respond. She becomes passive. Secondly, her cognitive ability to perceive success is changed. She does not believe her response will result in a favorable outcome, whether or not it might. Next, having generalized her helplessness, the battered woman does not believe anything she does will alter any outcome, not just the specific situation that has occurred. Finally, her sense of emotional well-being becomes precarious.[10]
According to Dr. Walker, the concept most important for understanding why battered women do not attempt to leave a battering relationship, is their belief that they have no control over what happens to them.[11] Once women are operating from a belief of helplessness, the perception becomes reality and they become passive, submissive, and helpless.[12]
B. Walker's Three Phase Cycle of Violence
A second theory used to explain the "battered woman syndrome, " the Cycle Theory of Violence, was first developed by Dr. Walker, and later verified by others. This theory helps explain how battered women become victimized, how they fall into learned helplessness behavior, and why they do not attempt to escape.[13]
Based on interviews with battered women, Dr. Walker identified three phases of the battering cycle which vary in both time and intensity: the tension-building phase; the explosion or acute battering incident; and the calm, loving respite phase.[14] During the first phase, the tension-building phase, threats and minor battering incidents occur. The woman subject to the attacks denies the incidents and becomes as compliant as possible fearing any reprisals. With each incident the tension builds and the woman loses control of the situation.[15] The second phase is marked by an acute battering incident. This phase lasts only a matter of hours, but the beating is much more severe than in phase one. Shock and denial on the part of both parties is characteristic of the period directly following the attack.[16] This leads into the third phase of the cycle, the calm, loving respite. This final phase is characterized by extremely...
To continue reading
Request your trial