Civil orders of protection (OPs) are the only victim-initiated legal intervention for intimate partner violence. The OP process is unique because victims write a narrative account of abuse to inform judges’ decision-making. Historically, feminist scholars have considered OPs as empowering to victims, as they can signal strength-based change and requesting needed relief. OPs also serve as an important tool for some mothers who need temporary protection related to child custody and visitation. Studies of OP narratives have found that content related to future risk is associated with securing an OP, including allegations of physical and severe violence, suggesting that OPs provide needed protection. At the same time, the OP process is disempowering for some women. The content and quality of survivors’ OP narratives vary greatly, and studies have found that well-written accounts are positively associated with securing OPs, uncovering the potential influence of judges’ implicit biases. This study used logistic regression to explore how violence risk and writing quality related to the receipt of emergency OPs in a sample of 90 petitions filed by women with minor children in a large Midwest County. As expected, violence severity was positively associated with securing an OP, controlling for the mention of other cases/orders and legal representation. However, the association was no longer significant when writing quality was considered; specifically, greater readability was associated with being granted an OP. Linear structure and appearance of narratives were not related to OP outcomes. Findings underscore the ongoing need to explore how the written narrative requirement of the OP process (dis)empowers survivors and the role implicit biases may play in judicial decision-making in civil OP proceedings.
- Award ID(s):
- 1353671
- NSF-PAR ID:
- 10148963
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Violence and Victims
- Volume:
- 34
- Issue:
- 4
- ISSN:
- 0886-6708
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 592 to 612
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
more » « less
-
more » « less
Sociologists have identified many factors that mitigate the progressive effects of the legal mobilization to end sexual violence. Within this body of research, however, there is little interrogation about the social construction of sexual harm. I use the case of child sexual abuse to investigate how prosecutors make sense of sexual harm. Data are qualitative interviews with 43 prosecutors. Findings reveal that prosecutors use a framework of sexual identity to construct sexual injury on the child’s body. The perceived harm centers on the anticipated loss of the child’s heterosexual potential. Girl victims are thought to grow into sexual promiscuity, and boy victims are thought to grow into sex offenders. Prosecutorial constructions of child sexual abuse cases are future-oriented, which increases their urgency, and these constructions also imagine the child as a person in formation, rather than a fully actualized person with intrinsic rights. In revealing how the state of sexual victimization is not only deeply gendered but also heteronormative, this research has theoretical implications for childhood studies, queer studies, and anti-violence advocacy.
-
COVID-19 disrupted many aspects of domestic violence services including sheltering, in-person advocacy, and access to mental health, visitation, and legal services. Increased demand for services occurred concurrent with the highest levels of pandemic disruptions. Adaptations to many systems and services were made to address survivor’s changing needs. To understand how various aspects of service provision were disrupted during the pandemic, we surveyed a national census of U.S. based domestic violence direct service agencies. Email addresses were collected from online directories and each agency received a link to complete a survey using the online platform Qualtrics. The survey included fve sections: services provided; work environment during COVID-19; disruptions caused by COVID-19; personal and organizational disaster preparedness; and demographics. Twenty-two percent of 1,341 agencies responded to the survey. At the start of the pandemic, the most disrupted services were legal and court, sheltering, and mental health/counselling services. Hazard pay, fexible scheduling, and additional information technology support were most frequently mentioned supports provided to mitigate disruptions and support providers and advocates. Disruptions and supports changed over the course of the pandemic. The COVID-19 pandemic disrupted the provision of services and advocacy to victims and survivors of domestic violence. Adaptations were made as new control measures were available (e.g. vaccines) and lessons learned were identifed (e.g. successful implementation of virtual legal and court services). Maintaining supportive measures post-pandemic will require continued investment in this chronically underfunded, yet critical, sector and applying lessons learned from COVID-19 related disruptions and adaptations.more » « less
-
more » « less
How did the COVID-19 pandemic affect domestic violence? We might expect that the most marginalized victims experienced the most dramatic upticks in violence during the pandemic. However, through life-story interviews, I found that survivors who were enduring abuse, poverty, housing insecurity, and systems involvement pre-COVID did not suffer worse abuse during the pandemic. For multiply marginalized survivors, COVID did not produce more violence directly, but instead worsened the social contexts in which they already experienced violence and related problems, setting them up for future instability. The small group of survivors in this study who did experience COVID as a novel period of violence were likely to be middle-class and better-resourced. To explain these findings, I suggest moving away from a model of crisis as “external stressor.” I offer the concept “clustered vulnerabilities” to explain how—rather than entering in as “shock”—crisis amplifies existing structural problems: social vulnerabilities pile up, becoming denser and more difficult to manage. “Clustered vulnerabilities” better explains crisis in the lives of marginalized people and is useful for analyzing the relationship between chronic disadvantage and crisis across cases.
-
more » « less
Reproductive coercion is an understudied form of intimate partner abuse related to physical, sexual, and psychological abuse. Prior research suggests that women accurately predict whether their abuser will continue the abuse. Thus, understanding factors related to these perceptions is necessary to enhance safety. Using a diverse sample of women in the United States seeking protection orders, the current study examines reproductive coercion as a predictor of women’s perceptions of future violence. Findings suggest that psychological abuse and, to a lesser extent, reproductive coercion are related to whether women believe their abuser will continue their abuse. Implications for research and services are discussed.
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1891/0886-6708.VV-D-18-00011
