Title: Legal Interventions in Family Violence: Research Findings and
Policy Implications.
Series: Research Report
Author: NIJ and ABA
Published: July 1998
Subject: Domestic violence, child abuse and neglect, elderly victims
118 pages
223,000 bytes

-------------------------------

Figures, charts, forms, and tables are not included in this ASCII plain-text
file. To view this document in its entirety, download the Adobe Acrobat
graphic file available from this Web site or order a print copy from NCJRS
at 800-851-3420.

-------------------------------

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
National Institute of Justice

Research Report

Legal Interventions in Family Violence: Research Findings and Policy
Implications

National Institute of Justice

American Bar Association

U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
810 Seventh Street N.W.
Washington, DC 20531

Janet Reno
Attorney General
U.S. Department of Justice

Raymond C. Fisher
Associate Attorney General

Laurie Robinson
Assistant Attorney General

Noel Brennan
Deputy Assistant Attorney General

Jeremy Travis
Director, National Institute of Justice

------------------------------- 

Office of Justice Programs
World Wide Web Site
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov

National Institute of Justice 
World Wide Web Site
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij

-------------------------------

Legal Interventions in Family Violence: Research Findings and Policy
Implications

A Project of the American Bar Association's Criminal Justice Section,
Commission on Domestic Violence, Center on Children and the Law, and
Commission on Legal Problems of the Elderly presented to the National
Institute of Justice.

July 1998
NCJ 171666

National Institute of Justice

Jeremy Travis
Director

Bernard Auchter
Program Manager, Violence Against Women and Family Violence
Research and Evaluation Program

John Thomas
Program Manager, Research in Action Partnerships

American Bar Association

Criminal Justice Section
Thomas C. Smith, Director
Project Staff
Susan W. Hillenbrand, Project Director
Barbara E. Smith, Research Investigator
Laura Nickles, Research Associate

Center on Children and the Law
Howard A. Davidson, Director
Project Advisor
Howard A. Davidson

Commission on Domestic Violence
Roberta Valente, Director
Project Advisors
Roberta Valente
Deborah Goelman

Commission on Legal Problems of the Elderly
Nancy Coleman, Director
Project Advisor
Lori Stiegel

The views expressed herein have not been approved by the House of
Delegates or the Board of Governors of the American Bar Association
and, accordingly, they should not be construed as representing the policy
of the American Bar Association. Further, this publication has not been
endorsed by the American Bar Association entities involved in its
production, including the Section of Criminal Justice, Commission on
Domestic Violence, Center on Children and the Law, and Commission on
Legal Problems of the Elderly.

This program was supported under award number 96-IJ-CX-K002 to the
American Bar Association by the National Institute of Justice, Office of
Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice. Findings and conclusions of
the research reported here are those of the authors and do not necessarily
reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

-------------------------------

The National Institute of Justice is a component of the Office of Justice
Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the
Bureau of Justice Statistics, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime.

-------------------------------

Table of Contents

Message From The Director 

Introduction

About This Publication

Chapter One: Research on Legal Interventions in Child Maltreatment
Cases

Children's Testimony

The Emotional Effects of Testifying on Sexually Abused Children 
Debra Whitcomb, Gail S. Goodman, Desmond K. Runyan, and Shirley
Hoak

Techniques for Improving Children's Testimony 
Debra Whitcomb

Effects of Cognitive Interviewing and Practice on Children's Recall
Performance
Karen J. Saywitz, R. Edward Geiselman, and Gail K. Bornstein

The Use of Closed-Circuit Television and Videotaped Testimony in Child
Sexual Abuse Trials: An Evaluation of BJA's Funding Program 
Sharon G. Elstein, Barbara E. Smith, Howard Davidson, Donald
Rebovich, Kathy Free, Mark Ells, and Caren Sempel

Children's Testimony and Their Perceptions of Stress in and out of the
Courtroom  
Karen J. Saywitz and Rebecca Nathanson

Prosecution of Child Abuse and Neglect Cases 

The Prosecution of Child Sexual and Physical Abuse Cases 
Barbara E. Smith and Sharon Goretsky Elstein

Prosecuting Child Physical Abuse Cases: A Case Study in San Diego 
Barbara E. Smith

Justice System Processing of Child Abuse and Neglect Cases 
Noy S. Davis and Susan J. Wells

Coordinating Criminal and Juvenile Court Proceedings in Child
Maltreatment Cases 
Debra Whitcomb and Mark Hardin

Sentencing

The Probation Response to Child Sexual Abuse Offenders: How Is it
Working? 
Barbara E. Smith, Susan W. Hillenbrand, and Sharon R. Goretsky

Managing Adult Sex Offenders in the Community--A Containment
Approach 
Kim English, Suzanne Pullen, and Linda Jones

Impact of Domestic Violence on Children's Behavior 

Children of Battered Women: The Relation of Child Behavior to Family
Violence and Maternal Stress
David A. Wolfe, Peter Jaffe, Susan Kaye Wilson, and Lydia Zak

Other

Parental Drug Testing in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases: The
Washington, D.C., Experience 
Lisa C. Newmark

Chapter Two: Research on Legal Interventions in Elder Abuse Cases 

Coordination and Collaboration

Working Relationships Between Adult Protective Services, Aging
Agencies, and Law Enforcement Agencies--A Short-Term Project
Toshio Tatara and Margaret Rittman

Collaboration Between Protective Services and Law Enforcement: The
Massachusetts Model  
Donna M. Reulbach and Jane Tewksbury

Recommendations to State Courts 

Recommended Guidelines for State Courts Handling Cases Involving
Elder Abuse
Lori A. Stiegel

Chapter Three: Research on Legal Interventions in Domestic Violence
Cases

Batterer and Victim Characteristics

Findings About Partner Violence From the Dunedin Multidisciplinary
Health and Development Study 
Terrie E. Moffitt, Avshalom Caspi, and Phil A. Silva

Florida Mortality Review Project: Executive Summary 
Byron Johnson, De Li, and Neil Websdale

Civil Protection Orders

Civil Protection Orders: Legislation, Current Court Practice, and
Enforcement
Peter Finn and Sarah Colson

The Effectiveness of Civil Protection Orders 
Susan Keilitz, Paula Hannaford, and Hillery S. Efkeman

Effects of Restraining Orders on Domestic Violence Victims 
Adele Harrell and Barbara Smith

Re-abuse in a Population of Court-Restrained Male Batterers: Why
Restraining Orders Don't Work 
Andrew R. Klein

Arrest

Does Arrest Deter Domestic Violence? 
Janell D. Schmidt and Lawrence W. Sherman

Must We Stop Arresting Batterers?: Analysis and Policy Implications of
New Police Domestic Violence Studies 
Joan Zorza

Mandatory Arrest of Batterers: A Reply to Its Critics 
Evan Stark

Determining Police Response to Domestic Violence Victims 
Eve S. Buzawa and Thomas Austin

Prosecution and Defense

Prosecution Response to Domestic Violence: Results of a Survey of Large
Jurisdictions 
Donald J. Rebovich

The Indianapolis Domestic Violence Prosecution Experiment 
David A. Ford and Mary Jean Regoli

Validity of "Battered Woman Syndrome" in Criminal Cases Involving
Battered Women 
Malcolm Gordon

Impact of Evidence Concerning Battering and Its Effects in Criminal
Trials Involving Battered Women 
Mary Ann Dutton

Trend Analysis: Expert Testimony on Battering and its Effects in Criminal
Cases 
Janet Parrish

Prosecuting Domestic Violence Cases With Reluctant Victims: Assessing
Two Novel Approaches in Milwaukee 
Robert C. Davis, Barbara E. Smith, and Laura Nickles

Court-Ordered Treatment

The Impact of Court-Ordered Treatment for Domestic Violence Offenders 
Adele Harrell

The Role of Drug and Alcohol Abuse in Domestic Violence and Its
Treatment: Dade County's Domestic Violence Court Experiment 
John S. Goldkamp, with Doris Weiland, Mark Collins and Michael White

Other 

Corporate Sector Response to Domestic Violence 
Nancy E. Isaac

Statistical Reports on Family Violence

-------------------------------

Message From the Director

Recent research has shed considerable light on family violence and various
efforts to combat it within the justice system. Much of the research has
direct, practical application for prosecutors, judges, defense attorneys,
victim/witness advocates, and members of the law enforcement
community. Typically, however, these practitioners are so caught up in
trying to meet the day-to-day demands of an overburdened system that
they cannot accord family violence research the attention it deserves. 

The National Institute of Justice and the American Bar Association share a
similar mission: to inform our constituencies about the effectiveness of
practical responses to family violence. This publication, the product of a
research partnership, is intended to provide busy practitioners with a
"quick and easy" overview of the wide range of available research on
family violence and to highlight a few major studies and their practical
implications. The goal is to encourage practitioners to "think research" in
dealing with family violence. 

NIJ is optimistic that the continuing research in this area can improve
criminal justice responses to family violence by making practitioners
aware of what works in which types of situations. It is our hope that this
publication will serve that purpose.

Jeremy Travis
Director, National Institute of Justice

-------------------------------

Introduction

Violence inflicted by one family member against another includes child
physical and sexual abuse and neglect; domestic violence; and elder abuse.
Sorting out and understanding violent behavior among family members
presents complex challenges. Many factors render traditional criminal
justice responses inappropriate or ineffective--the cyclical nature of family
violence, the relationship between the perpetrator and victim, the causes
and effects for both perpetrator and victim; the frequent ambivalence of
the victim/witnesses toward involvement of the criminal justice system
because of coercion by or fear of the perpetrator, and the guarded privacy
traditionally accorded the family. 

As public awareness and concern about family violence have increased in
recent years, many practitioners have sought to fashion responses that take
into account the needs of victims as well as punishment and treatment of
perpetrators. However, the myriad variables surrounding these responses
often send complex and sometimes conflicting signals to even the most
sophisticated criminal justice practitioners. Research performs an
invaluable function by identifying and sorting through these variables to
determine how they affect, and are affected by, various criminal justice
responses.

About This Publication

This publication contains "bottom line" information from articles written
by researchers about their own work or in several instances about other
researchers' work on subjects of immediate concern to practitioners:
collaborative efforts between police and protection agencies, arrest
policies, protection orders, battered women defense strategies, sentencing,
batterer treatment, child sexual abuse, and children's testimony. 

The research findings are the core of the document. It is from these that
the researchers have derived their implications for practice and it is from
these that the reader may derive additional--and perhaps different--
implications for their own particular practice. 

The studies summarized in this publication represent only those that relate
specifically to how the criminal justice system addresses family violence.
Other aspects of family violence, such as those associated with custody
and divorce proceedings are not included. Also not included are findings
from ongoing research mandated by the groundbreaking Violence Against
Women Act of 1994--for example, the effects of the "full faith and credit"
clause as it pertains to protection orders. 

Most of the articles were written by the researchers who conducted the
studies, but several were written by commentators on research undertaken
by others. 

The summaries were compiled and edited by staff of the ABA
dissemination project who have generally maintained the language and
terms from the original documents even when aware of their limitations. 

In most instances the summaries merely mirror major findings and
implications in the underlying documents. When project staff have drawn
practical implications from the findings, this is noted in the text. All the
research highlighted here has received scrutiny, either through peer review
or review by funding agencies or publishers.

As science investigates complex, sensitive, and private issues, such as
family violence, various methodological limitations can cloud the
interpretation of findings. Reported results can vary depending on the type
of sampled population; specific variables measured; and other personal,
family, or community characteristics not included in the research effort.
For example, secondary analysis and replication efforts arising from the
seminal 1984 Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment have yielded
differing results regarding the extent to which mandatory arrest and "no
drop" prosecution policies prevent further violence.

The long-range aim of this publication is to encourage continued
investigation into family violence and continued critical review of the
results so that practitioners can make better informed decisions about
practical criminal justice responses.

-------------------------------

Chapter One: Research on Legal Interventions in Child Maltreatment
Cases

During the past decade, there has been a proliferation of research on child
abuse, especially child sexual abuse. While many of the research findings
relate to legal interventions to assist child victims in the civil arena, the 13
research projects summarized in this chapter were selected because of their
relevance for criminal justice practitioners. These are organized into four
main research topics: children's testimony, prosecution of child abuse and
neglect cases, sentencing, and the impact of domestic violence on children.
The findings can help law enforcement officers, prosecutors,
victim/witness advocates, probation officers, and judges better respond to
these especially vulnerable victims and their families. 

Children's Testimony

Researchers and practitioners have questioned the impacts, positive and
negative, of children testifying in court cases and have searched for ways
to make the process less onerous for children while protecting the rights of
the accused. Five research studies are summarized; four center on
testimony in child sexual abuse cases and the fifth one on children's
testimony in general. 

The first study examines whether appearing in court benefits or harms
sexually abused children. It concludes that testifying can be both harmful
and beneficial depending upon the circumstances under which, and the
number of times, children testify. Children are less stressed when there is a
high level of maternal support and when the environment is child friendly.
The second study looks at interviewing, communication enhancement, and
courtroom preparation techniques and offers suggestions to improve the
way professionals interview children. The third examines the effects of
cognitive interviewing techniques and concludes that these techniques can
help children's recall. The fourth is an evaluation of the Bureau of Justice
Assistance's (BJA's) closed-circuit television and videotaped testimony
funding program, which contains suggestions for criminal justice planners
and professionals interested in starting or expanding their use of
closed-circuit television or videotape technologies. The last summary is of
a research project that explores the impact of the courtroom environment
on the quality of evidence given by children and the level of
system-induced stress on children. It concludes that testifying in a
child-friendly environment yields more accurate testimony and results in
less stress to the child.

Prosecution of Child Abuse and Neglect Cases

Prosecution of child sexual and physical abuse and child neglect cases
presents special challenges for prosecutors and victim/witness advocates.
Much has been learned in the past decade about how to meet those
challenges and effectively prosecute cases while protecting the child and
the rights of the accused. 

The first of the two studies summarized on this topic examines the
outcomes of nearly 1,000 child sexual abuse cases in 10 counties,
including case dynamics, the use of specialized techniques, case
dispositions, and sentences imposed. Implications drawn from the study
results offer suggestions to improve the response of the criminal justice
system to such cases. The focus of the second summary is a case study of
San Diego's multiagency response to child physical abuse cases that
contains suggestions to help other communities successfully prosecute
these types of cases. 

Sentencing

Probation is a common or even primary sentence for persons convicted of
child sexual abuse. Most probation orders require the offender to seek
treatment and stay away from the victim and/or other children. Two
research studies are included. The first study examines the use of
probation as an alternative to incarceration, or in conjunction with
incarceration, in child sexual abuse cases. The results are based on a
national survey on probation departments' supervision of child sexual
abuse offenders and case studies in four jurisdictions that explored the
effectiveness of probation in these types of cases. The summary contains
recommendations for improving the response to these offenders. The
second study also looks at the management of adult sex offenders but is
broader as it includes both probation and parole departments and it deals
with adult sex offenders whose victims are adults as well as children. It is
included because the findings apply to those who sexually offend against
children and many of the findings and recommendations mirror those of
the first study. 

Impact of Domestic Violence on Children's Behavior

Children who witness domestic violence often suffer psychological and
behavior problems. The article included here measures the extent of
difficulties experienced by children of domestic violence. It concludes that
children from violent homes experience significantly more behavior
problems than those from nonviolent homes. This is especially true for
boys, for children exposed to a higher frequency and intensity of physical
violence, and for children whose mothers report more negative life events.

-------------------------------

CHILDREN'S TESTIMONY

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From 

The Emotional Effects of Testifying on Sexually Abused Children

by Debra Whitcomb, Gail S. Goodman, Desmond K. Runyan, and Shirley
Hoak[1]

Purpose of Research

To examine whether testifying in court benefits or harms sexually abused
children.

Methods

Three studies that used the same research instruments to measure mental
health were analyzed:

o A National Institute of Justice (NIJ)-funded study in North Carolina that
reassessed the mental health of 62 children between the ages of 6 and 17
(an earlier grant from the National Center on Child Abuse and Neglect had
assessed their mental health 5 months after referral to the study). Reports
of sexual abuse of all of the children had been substantiated by child
protection agencies.

o An NIJ-funded study in Denver that assessed the mental health of
children between the ages of 4 and 17. All of the children's perpetrators
were charged in criminal courts in three counties in the Denver area. The
children's mental health was evaluated four times: at the time they were
referred to the study, 3 months after testifying, 7 months after testifying,
and after the disposition of the cases. A matched-pair design (matching
children on key demographic and case characteristics) was used to
compare 60 children who testified at any proceeding (competency hearing,
preliminary hearing, pretrial hearing, or trial) with 60 children who did not
testify at any hearing.

o An Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention-funded study
in four jurisdictions that replicated the North Carolina study on a much
larger sample of children (256) with a focus on children who testified in
criminal court. Instruments were administered shortly after the case was
referred to the prosecutor and again 7 to 9 months later.

Findings

Differences in findings from the three studies do not allow a conclusive
finding as to whether testifying harms or benefits sexually abused
children. The Denver study found that testifying may impede the
improvement process for some children while the North Carolina study
found that testifying may enhance the recovery of some children. The
different findings may have been the result of the different proceedings at
which children testified. The children in the North Carolina study testified
in child protection proceedings while the children in the Denver study
testified in criminal court, a much more adversarial system. 

Similarities across the three studies include:

o Children scored high on measures of stress and anxiety at the initial
testing.

o Children who testified more than once generally did not improve as
much as children who never testified or only testified once.

o Most children tended to improve with time whether they testified in
court or not.

Implications for Prosecutors, Judges,Law Enforcement, and
Victim/Witness Advocates

The Denver study found that children appeared to benefit when the
environment of the criminal court was made more child friendly, such as
by closing the court to spectators or allowing a parent or other support
person to be present when the child testifies. The U.S. Supreme Court has
ruled that under special circumstances the criminal process can be
modified. This beneficial finding of a child-friendly environment has
implications for all the practitioners in the criminal justice system--judges,
prosecutors, victim/witness advocates, and law enforcement:

o If children need innovative courtroom procedures to testify, prosecutors
should consider making the argument that testifying without these
innovations would be too traumatic for the victim.

o Judges should consider whether the children would be sufficiently
traumatized to warrant modifying the courtroom. 

o Victim/witness advocates should accompany children to court to provide
comfort and support, especially when the parent is unable, or unwilling, to
do so.

o Children may also benefit when law enforcement interviews children in
a child-friendly place (or room) rather than in a frightening police station
environment.

Study results also suggest how prosecutors and victim advocates can aid in
children's mental health recovery:

o Maternal support was positively associated with children's mental health
improvement. The North Carolina study found that mothers who were
given help with their own emotional stress were better able to help their
children recover. Prosecutors as well as victim/advocates can assist by
explaining the criminal process to mothers and by referring those who are
stressed to mental health counseling.

o In each of the three studies, children who testified more than once were
found to recover more slowly than those who testified only once.
Prosecutors should consider limiting the child's testimony to one
proceeding, if at all possible.

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From 

Techniques for Improving Children's Testimony

by Debra Whitcomb[2]

Purpose of Research

To identify techniques that can improve children's ability to communicate
as witnesses without impairing the validity of the children's stories. The
research can be divided into three main areas: Interviewing Techniques,
Communication Enhancement Techniques, and Courtroom Preparation
Techniques.

Interviewing Techniques

Practitioners increasingly are asked to defend their interviewing
techniques regarding allegations of child sexual abuse. These techniques
include the use of anatomically detailed dolls and leading questions, which
assist in gaining information from children who are reluctant or unable to
describe their experience.

Anatomically Detailed Dolls. Several studies suggest that the use of dolls
helps children communicate what happened to them:

o One study revealed that twice as many children identified suspected
perpetrators when using dolls than when not using the dolls. Dolls were
very helpful for children under the age of 3, but some children provided no
information even after the doll was used (Leventhal et al., 1989).

o Another study suggested that dolls may be more helpful for older
children than for younger children in eliciting correct and truthful
responses (Goodman and Aman, 1990).

o Critics suggested that the use of dolls places unnatural and increased
attention on body parts, so that abused children might display sexually
explicit behaviors (Wakefield and Underwager, 1988). Others point out
that research does not support that claim and suggest that there is no
evidence that the dolls disturb children in any way.

Leading Questions. Another controversial interviewing technique is the
use of leading questions. Critics claim that leading questions direct the
child's story. Often, however, leading questions are the result of the
interviewer making unjustified assumptions prior to posing a question.
Studies in this area found:

o Specific questions elicited more information from children than general
questions but specific questions also increased the risk of inaccurate
information (Dent, 1991).

o Although direct and specific questions increased the risk of false
information, there was an even greater risk that not asking direct questions
would leave vital information regarding touch unreported (Saywitz et al.,
1991).

o Repeated leading questioning influenced children 5 and 6 years old,
especially if the questions were ambiguous. Factors identified as affecting
responses to leading questions were delay since the event, repeated
suggestions by persons of authority, and leading questions being posed by
more than one interviewer. In addition, younger children appeared to be
much more vulnerable to these types of questions (Goodman and
Clarke-Stewart, 1991). 

Communication Enhancement Techniques

Interviewers should try to phrase questions in a developmentally sensitive
manner. When interviewing a child who may have been sexually abused,
interviewers need to be aware that children:

o Think in concrete terms.

o Do not organize their thoughts logically.

o Have limited understanding of space, distance, and time.

o Have a complex understanding of truth and lying.

o See the world egocentrically.

o Have a limited attention span. 

o Have varying degrees of comfort with strangers (Waterman, 1986).

It is recommended that interviewers turn to the child's caretaker for better
understanding of any idiosyncratic responses the child may provide
(Melton and Thompson, 1987). While children's ages may be the same,
their positions in the developmental process may differ. Caretakers should
be consulted for more individual information about the child.

Courtroom Preparation Techniques

Research reveals that as children get older they gain a better understanding
of the legal system. Programs have been developed to assist children in
understanding the system, which may include using the following:

o Tours of courtrooms and introductions to key court personnel.

o Coloring or activity books.

o Miniature-sized courtrooms with movable figures and furniture.

o Videotapes explaining the court process.

Implications for Practitioners

When interviewing children who may have been sexually abused, it is
recommended that the interviewer:

o Supplement use of anatomically detailed dolls with other interviewing
techniques, rather than focusing solely upon the dolls.

o Use both general and direct interview questions but avoid repeated
leading questions.

o Consult the child's primary caretaker about the child's language skills
and idiosyncratic responses, and make sure the questions are appropriate
for the child's developmental stage.

o Be aware of the extent of the child's knowledge of the legal process and
take the time necessary to educate him or her on the process. 

Practitioners would benefit from regular training to update their
interviewing skills and to enhance their ability to detect instances of
miscommunication between the child being interviewed and the
interviewer.

References

Dent, H.R. "Experimental Studies of Interviewing Child Witnesses." In
Doris, J. (ed.), The Suggestibility of Children's Recollections. Washington,
D.C.: American Psychological Association (1991), 138-146.

Goodman, G.S. and A. Clarke-Stewart. "Suggestibility in Children's
Testimony: Implications for Sexual Abuse Investigations." In The
Suggestibility of Children's Recollections, Doris, J. (ed.). Washington,
D.C.: American Psychological Association (1991), 92-105.

Goodman, G.S., and C. Aman. "Children's Use of Anatomically Detailed
Dolls to Recount an Event." Child Development, 61 (1990), 1859-1871.

Leventhal, J.M., Hamilton, J., Rekedal, S., Tebano-Micci, A., and C.
Eyster. "Anatomically Correct Dolls Used in Interviews of Young
Children Suspected of Having Been Sexually Abused." Pediatrics, 84
(1989), 900-906.

Melton, G.B. and R.A. Thompson. "Detours to Less Traveled Paths in
Child Witness Research" In Ceci, S. J., Toglia, M.P., and D.F. Ross (eds.),
Children's Eye-witness Memory. New York: Springer-Verlag (1987), 217-
218.

Saywitz, K., Goodman, G., Nicholas, E., and S. Moan. "Children's
Memories of a Physical Examination Involving Genital Touch:
Implications for Reports of Child Sexual Abuse." Journal of Consulting
and Clinical Psychology, 59(5) (1991), 682-691.

Wakefield, H., and R. Underwager. Accusations of Child Sexual Abuse.
Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas (1988), 202-210.

Waterman, J. "Developmental Considerations" In MacFarlane, K., and J.
Waterman et al. (eds.), Sexual Abuse of Young Children. New York: The
Guilford Press (1986), 15-29.

-------------------------------

Findings and Implications Drawn From 

Effects of Cognitive Interviewing and Practice on Children's Recall
Performance

by Karen J. Saywitz, R. Edward Geiselman, and Gail K. Bornstein [3]

Purpose of Research

To refine and evaluate the modified version of the cognitive interview for
children originally designed by Geiselman and Padilla; to evaluate the
effects of practicing cognitive interview techniques before the interview;
and to evaluate the completeness and accuracy of reports from children
who participated in the staged event compared with those who only
witnessed it. 

Methods

In two studies, 132 children were interviewed about staged activities. In
one study, the staged event centered on a private encounter between an
unfamiliar man (played by the research assistant) and two children. Games
involving touching were played (such as Simon Says) and one of the
children in each pair wore a costume. Pictures were taken with an
"instamatic" camera. One child played the observer and one child the
participant.

In the first study, 20 children between the ages of 7 and 8 and another
group of 20 between the ages of 10 and 11 were randomly assigned to
either the cognitive or standard interview condition and also were
randomly assigned to play the participant versus the observer. In the
second study, 34 children aged 8 and 9 and 58 aged 11 and 12 were
assigned to one of three interview conditions: cognitive interviewing with
practice, cognitive interviewing without practice, and rapport building
followed by standard police interviewing techniques.

Interviewers who were off-duty detectives from the Los Angeles County
Sheriff's Department were randomly assigned to conduct the cognitive
interview. They were not provided information about the staged event.

In both studies, children participated in a staged event and were later
interviewed. The scenarios were conducted at a local school and
videotaped so the children's statements could be compared with what
actually took place. The children were interviewed 2 days after the staged
event. Both the cognitive and standard police interviews began with
rapport building with the child. Interviewers in the standard interview used
questioning procedures that they normally use with children that began
with an open-ended question asking the children to describe what
happened. Those in the cognitive interviewing condition were trained in
the use of cognitive memory retrieval techniques.

Findings

The transcribed taped interviews were analyzed in terms of five dependent
variables: (1) number of correct facts recalled, (2) number of incorrect
items recalled, (3) number of questions asked about the staged event, (4)
total time taken to conduct the interview, and (5) number of rapport
exchanges preceding questioning. The analysis yielded the following:

o The older children recalled significantly more correct facts than the
younger children did.

o For all age groups, the cognitive interview significantly increased the
number of correct facts recalled over the standard interview.

o Children who were bystanders made more errors than those who were
participants. However, they did not differ on number of correct facts
recalled.

o The younger children produced significantly more incorrect items than
the older children did. 

o The average number of questions asked did not differ significantly as a
function of age of the child or whether the child was a witness or
participant.

o The length of the interview was the same for the older and younger
children. Cognitive interviews took about 5 minutes longer to conduct
than standard interviews in the first study, but in the second study, there
were no significant differences.

o Cognitive interviewing with practice was superior to cognitive
interviewing without practice and both were superior to standard police
interview techniques. Practice with these novel interviewing techniques
prior to the interview produced a significantly greater number of correct
pieces of information recalled.

Implications for Criminal Justice Officials

Recollections of school-age children can be improved through cognitive
interviewing, which becomes even more effective when:

o Interviewers and children become practiced with cognitive interviewing
techniques.

o Interviewers receive training--a critical aspect to the success of cognitive
interviewing techniques. Important elements to successful training are
role-playing, critique of style, and experienced and proficient cognitive
interviewing trainers.

-------------------------------

Findings and Implications Drawn From

The Use of Closed-Circuit Television and Videotaped Testimony in Child
Sexual Abuse Trials: An Evaluation of BJA's Funding Program

by Sharon G. Elstein, Barbara E. Smith, Howard Davidson, Donald
Rebovich, Kathy Free, Mark Ells, and Caren Sempel[4]

Purpose of Research

In 1993, the Bureau of Justice Assistance announced that funding was
available to States to provide assistance in purchasing equipment and
training in the use of closed-circuit television and/or videotape equipment
in child sexual abuse trials. The National Institute of Justice funded the
American Bar Association and the American Prosecutors Research
Institute to evaluate the impact of the BJA projects. 

Methods

The project's methods included: (1) a telephone survey of the 26 States
receiving BJA funds; (2) a follow-on indepth telephone survey of
jurisdictions to assess the effectiveness of the technologies; (3) a 50-State
legal analysis including an analysis of appellate cases; and (4) site studies
of four States that have implemented a promising strategy for others to
replicate, either in distribution, administration, or installation of
equipment, or in providing training on legal, interview, or technical setup
skills.

Findings

For the 26 States that received BJA funding, the researchers found the
following:

o In compliance with BJA requirements, the States conducted a needs
assessment to determine how to distribute the technologies, but many
States elected an informal, as opposed to a formal, assessment process.

o Most States elected to distribute the funds on a countywide, as opposed
to a statewide, basis.

o Funds were fairly equally divided between the purchase of closed-circuit
and videotape equipment. Many States also expended BJA dollars on
training.

o Many States experienced delays in using BJA funds and had to
overcome funding implementation obstacles.

o High marks were given to the impact and usefulness of both videotape
and closed-circuit equipment. Most prosecutors said that the technologies
were available and useful when needed. Prosecutors generally perceived
that the technologies reduced trauma to the child. It was emphasized that
closed-circuit television or the introduction of videotape interviews is
needed only in a minority of cases and that "live" testimony of children is
preferred. But on those rare occasions when a child simply cannot testify
except on camera, these technologies were considered an invaluable tool.

o Despite obstacles to the implementation of BJA funding, the States
persevered and implemented the use of closed-circuit television and
videotape equipment and/or provided training. Many States were creative
in the use of the funds and stretched the limited BJA dollars
(approximately $38,000 to each of the 26 States) by combining these
dollars with other Federal or State funds targeted for children's issues.
Consequently, they were able to accomplish much more than would have
been possible with a single funding source.

Implications for Federal Funding Agencies

Federal agencies should consider the benefit of requiring matching funds
from States to demonstrate their interest in pursuing programs supported
by Federal dollars. BJA required jurisdictions to demonstrate State support
for the projects by making a hard match of 25 percent a condition of the
award. Limited Federal funds can be used very effectively in supporting
States with a demonstrated history of ongoing programs focused on a
particular strategy for prosecuting child sexual abuse cases. States with a
history of supporting closed-circuit television and videotape technologies
were able to combine the BJA funding with other Federal and State funds
and create an ambitious program.

Implications for Criminal Justice Planners and Professionals

The researchers offered the following suggestions with respect to training,
multiagency cooperation, resources, and equipment:

o Localities should take advantage of the strengths of various agencies
within their jurisdiction when implementing child abuse programs. In
particular, they should look to existing child advocacy centers and multi-
disciplinary teams, which investigate and prosecute child sexual abuse
allegations, to help implement such programs. The existing open
communication across agencies involved in multidisciplinary teams may
help ensure the success of such efforts. 

The input of prosecutors, judges, law enforcement, investigators, defense
attorneys, victim/witness advocates, doctors, mentalhealth workers, and
other professionals involved with abused children can help considerably in
implementing closed-circuit television and videotape projects.

o Training provided to a broad spectrum of criminal justice professionals
should be a critical component of any effort to implement new strategies--
or to expand existing strategies--for prosecuting child abuse cases. With
respect to the closed-circuit and videotape projects, training is important
on technical aspects of the equipment, but more important on the legal
requirements for using the technologies and forensic interviewing skills
with abused children.

o To maximize resources, States should consider employing mobile units
if special technologies will be used in a minority of cases. Statewide or
regionwide mobile units can be effective in ensuring that closed-circuit
television equipment is available to any court where it is needed, while at
the same time eliminating the waste involved in having the equipment lie
dormant. States may implement a program where small counties can
access videotape equipment at facilities designed for taping
testimony/interviews, such as at local child advocacy centers.

o Closed-circuit television and videotape technologies are firmly
established in the criminal justice system as appropriate for use in special
cases. The researchers recommended that States:

--Continue to plan for the use of closed-circuit television and videotape
equipment.

--Ensure that these technologies are available for appropriate cases in
counties across the State.

--Ensure that those using the technologies are adequately trained in
technical and substantive issues related to their use.

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

Children's Testimony and Their Perceptions of Stress in and out of the
Courtroom

by Karen J. Saywitz and Rebecca Nathanson[5]

Purpose of Research

To explore the effect of the courtroom environment on the quality of
evidence given by children and the level of system-induced stress on
children.

Methods

Children were assigned to two conditions, one in which an interview was
conducted in the child's school and one in which the interview was
conducted in a courtroom. A matched sample was used in which 34
children between the ages of 8 and 10 were assigned to each of the groups
based on socioeconomic status and age. 

The activity the children were to remember was a 30-minute staged event
during which an adult male taught the children about the parts and
functions of the human body. A structured interview was used to evaluate
free and probed recall of the staged event 2 weeks after the staged event.
The interview either took place at the school or in a courtroom with actors
playing the roles of judge, defense attorney, prosecutor, bailiff, jurors, and
spectators.

Findings

Comparisons between children who were questioned about the staged
event in the courtroom versus at school found:

o Children interviewed at school recalled significantly more correct items
than children interviewed at court on the free recall part of the questioning.

o For probed questions, children interviewed at court gave significantly
more incorrect responses to probed questions than children interviewed at
school.

o Children interviewed at school made significantly fewer errors on
misleading questions than did children interviewed at court.

o Children interviewed at court perceived their experience as significantly
more stressful on some of the measures than children interviewed at
school.

o The more stressful children perceived their court experience to be, the
fewer correct items they reported in free recall.

Implications for Judges, Law Enforcement Officers, Victim/Witness
Advocates, and Prosecutors [These implications are not explicit in the
presentation but appear to follow from the findings.]

The following implications present suggestions to help reduce children's
stress and anxiety associated with interviews and the court setting:

o Interviewing children in places where they feel comfortable may yield
fuller, more accurate accounts than interviewing them in a potentially
frightening place, such as a police station, prosecutor's office, or formal
victim/witness office.

o Victim/witness advocates and prosecutors can help reduce stress on
children who must testify in court by walking them through the court
process in a courtroom. This would also help reduce children's fear of the
setting. Allowing a child to hold a familiar toy may also minimize the
strangeness of the court setting.

o To reduce children's anxiety about the court setting, it might be helpful
for a judge to meet the child in the courtroom before the hearing to explain
the proceeding in less frightening terms. If there would be a conflict for
the trial judge to do this, another judge might substitute, or the explanation
might be given right before the hearing begins with the lawyers present.

-------------------------------

PROSECUTION OF CHILD ABUSE AND NEGLECT CASES

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

The Prosecution of Child Sexual and Physical Abuse Cases

by Barbara E. Smith and Sharon Goretsky Elstein[6]

Purpose of Research

To determine how cases of child physical and sexual abuse are being
prosecuted and to examine the outcomes of child sexual abuse cases in
criminal courts across the country.

Methods

Project staff employed two methods of data collection: a telephone survey
of 600 prosecutors nationwide regarding child physical and sexual abuse
(conducted in 1990 and 1991) and the collection of information from
nearly 1,000 case files of sexual abuse in 10 counties (for cases disposed
of between 1988 and 1992; dates of disposition varied from county to
county).

Findings

The study compared the findings from the national telephone survey of
prosecutors with the nearly 1,000 case files of child sexual abuse. Based
on the telephone interviews and the case file review, the researchers found:

o Prosecutors noted an increase in fondling offenses in the 2 years prior to
the survey. The case data revealed that 22 percent of the cases involved
only fondling offenses.

o Prosecutors reported seeing more cases involving younger children in
the 2 years prior to the survey. The case file data confirmed that many
cases with young children are being prosecuted. The researchers found
more than one-tenth (14 percent) of the victims were age 5 or younger.

o Many prosecutors noted an increase in the number or proportion of
perpetrators using alcohol or drugs in the 2 years prior to the survey. In the
case data, the researchers found that 18 percent of the defendants used
alcohol and 6 percent used drugs during (or shortly prior to) the sexual
assault.

o Prosecutors stated that they see very few cases of child sexual abuse by
strangers, and noted a rise in the number of cases with step-parents,
romantic partners of the parent, and biological parents in the 2 years prior
to the survey. The case data document the prevalence of abuse by
perpetrators known to the child. In only 6 percent of the cases were
victims abused by strangers while 32 percent were abused by a parent
or parental figure.

o The majority of prosecutors stated during the telephone survey that they
do not divert child sexual abuse offenders at any stage in the process. Of
the cases that passed indictment, only 3 percent of the offenders were
diverted prior to conviction, according to the case data.

o Prosecutors stated during the telephone survey that the most likely
sentence in child sexual abuse cases was more than 1 year of incarceration,
with the next most likely sentence being probation. In the case data, the
researchers found that 59 percent of offenders were given a jail or prison
sentence and 64 percent were given probation (these were not mutually
exclusive; 14 percent of the offenders who received incarcerated time were
sentenced to a period of probation following their incarceration).

Implications for Law Enforcement, Prosecutors, Child Protective Services,
and the Medical Community

Prosecutors seldom see child physical abuse cases compared with the
frequency with which they see sexual abuse cases. (Indeed, that was why
the researchers examined only child sexual abuse cases in the case study;
not enough counties could be located that prosecuted sufficient numbers of
physical abuse cases to be included in the study.) The researchers
concluded that prosecutors should have the opportunity to review many
more child physical abuse cases to assess the feasibility of criminal
prosecution. Strategies such as public education; training of law
enforcement, child protective services, and medical authorities to identify
cases appropriate for prosecutorial review; and training of prosecutors to
prosecute these cases, hold promise for increasing the frequency with
which prosecutors accept child physical abuse cases for prosecution. 

Implications for Law Enforcement and Prosecutors 

The study found that the use of "special techniques" such as closed-circuit
television, videotaped testimony, and anatomically correct dolls is not
needed in most child sexual abuse investigations and prosecutions. In most
cases, careful preparation of the witness will be sufficient, but these
special tools are very important in the limited number of cases where
children cannot talk about the abuse without using them.

Implications for the Criminal Justice and the Substance Abuse Therapeutic
Communities 

Defendants in the cases studied frequently were using alcohol or drugs
during the abusive incident or had a history of alcohol or drug abuse. In
light of the large number of child molesters who have alcohol or drug
abuse problems, criminal justice officials (judges, prosecutors, probation
officers, and defense attorneys) and the substance abuse therapeutic
communities need to consider implementing a comprehensive treatment
approach for convicted child molesters. 

Implications for Public Education 

In the cases studied, the child almost always knew the defendant (often a
parent or parental figure). Public attention should continue to focus on the
dangers of children being molested by strangers, but just as important, the
general public should be educated to the reality that more than 90 percent
of all child sexual abuse offenders are individuals known to the children
they abuse. This is especially important in criminal justice cases. Members
of the public make up jury pools and increased public awareness that child
sexual abuse is often perpetrated by individuals close to the child would
help in prosecuting these cases.

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

Prosecuting Child Physical Abuse Cases: A Case Study in San Diego

by Barbara E. Smith[7]

Purpose of Research

To learn via a case study in San Diego, California, about a coordinated
response to the prosecution of child physical abuse cases and to help other
communities replicate the model.

Methods

The case study included extensive interviews with child protective
services, law enforcement, prosecutors, and staff at Children's Hospital as
well as data collected from 15 case files.

Findings

San Diego has a multiagency approach to prosecuting child physical abuse
cases with several distinctive characteristics:

o The police department and the district attorney's office each have
specialized units with specially trained staff members. Child Protective
Services provides a 6- to 8-week training program on investigating child
abuse and neglect cases for newly hired workers.

o The roles and responsibilities of each agency are delineated in a
memorandum of agreement to ensure that one agency does not interfere
with the work of another.

o The medical community plays a pivotal role in collecting and
interpreting evidence of child physical abuse.

o Multiagency meetings among prosecutors, law enforcement, child
protective services, and the medical community foster coordination of
individual cases and provide a forum for discussing general issues. 

Implications for Prosecutors, Law Enforcement, Child Protective Workers,
and the Medical Communities

Based on the case files, interviews, and other study data, the researchers
drew the following practical implications:

o Any case in which a child's injury appears suspicious should be carefully
scrutinized to determine if criminal action is warranted. The common
assumption that prosecutors will reject physical injury cases because they
are too difficult to prove needs to be changed. 

What can be done to facilitate prosecutors receiving and reviewing more
physical abuse cases? Public education, training of criminal justice and
medical authorities, and a willingness to take on the challenge of cases that
are difficult to prove are strategies that hold promise for increasing the
frequency with which prosecutors accept physical child abuse cases for
prosecution. 

o A coordinated multiagency response among child protective services, the
police, the medical community, and the prosecutor is recommended. 

The successful prosecution of criminal cases depends on the effectiveness
of the prosecutor and on the quality of the investigation conducted before
the prosecutor receives the case. Indeed, the early investigative work can
make or break the case for the prosecutor. Therefore, it is important that
the medical, child protective service, and law enforcement communities
look for signs that a child's injuries were intentional and conduct sound
investigations that will preserve the important evidence for the prosecution
and defense. 

o Specialization, coupled with extensive training, should be given strong
consideration as an important foundation for building sound prosecution
cases.

In San Diego, specialization within the police department and the
prosecutor's office was important in several respects. First, specialization
created a core of professionals who received the best available training on
child abuse investigations and prosecutions. This is especially important in
physical abuse cases where the key evidence often rests on complicated
medical evidence. It also facilitates the acquisition of knowledge on the
psychology of child abusers and the dynamics in intrafamilial abuse, so
common in these cases. Second, specialization allows law enforcement
and prosecutors to build an extensive level of experience in investigating
and prosecuting child abuse cases. Third, specialization results in a small
number of law enforcement officers and prosecutors handing child abuse
cases. Because the number of personnel is small, professionals have the
opportunity to form close-knit interpersonal working relationships.

o Public education designed to reach future potential jurors about the
nature of child physical abuse should be given priority.

The San Diego study leaves little doubt that child physical abuse cases
will remain difficult to prosecute unless jurors are enlightened about the
dynamics involved in these types of cases. Ten years ago, juror disbelief
that child sexual abuse occurred was common, but that has begun to
change with public education (although the fallout from some highly
publicized cases appears to have created some degree of backlash among
the public). Public education in the area of physical abuse needs to reach
the level that public education has on sexual abuse. Unless that happens, it
is likely that prosecutors will continue to confront jurors who are reluctant
to convict.

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

Justice System Processing of Child Abuse and Neglect Cases

edited by Noy S. Davis and Susan J. Wells[8]

Purpose of Research

To better understand the civil and criminal justice system processing of
child abuse and neglect cases; to determine the types of coordination
activities that result in more effective justice system processing; and to
determine the potential for tracking cases through the child protective
services and legal systems to facilitate case coordination and allow for the
study of case processing and court outcomes.

Methods

The research had four unique components: (1) a national telephone survey
of child protective services, law enforcement, and court personnel in 41
counties; (2) a case study comparison of the processing of child
maltreatment cases in two sites; (3) a case study of one site that
aggressively prosecutes cases of child physical abuse; and (4) a
prospective case tracking study in one site in which 450 cases were
prospectively tracked from the time of the report through the juvenile and
criminal justice systems. The project took place between 1993 and 1995.

Findings

Findings from the national telephone survey revealed that:

o Slightly less than one-half of the law enforcement agencies surveyed for
the study had specialized units to investigate reports of child abuse and
neglect.

o There were substantial differences among the 41 counties in the extent of
communication between law enforcement and child protective service
agencies. The most frequent pattern called for law enforcement to
cross-report to child protective services. Less than half of the counties
reported using a multidisciplinary approach.

o Respondents noted no established criteria guiding the prosecutor's
decision to drop, plea bargain, or try a case. More than two-thirds of the
counties had a specialized prosecution unit to handle child abuse and
neglect cases.

o Communication between the prosecutor's office and child protective
services was rated as minimal in most counties.

o Several technical factors were identified as inhibitors to the tracking of
cases from one agency to another such as inconsistent information
maintained in databases; differing geographical boundaries and
jurisdictions; widely varying timeframes for case actions; and the lack of a
system for giving feedback on case outcomes to other agencies.

Findings from the case study comparison of the processing of child
maltreatment cases in two sites showed that:

o In cases that involved both juvenile and criminal proceedings, there were
conflicting opinions as to whether the timing of the dual proceedings had
any negative impact on the outcome of either proceeding.

o In both sites there was neither routine, direct communication between
the juvenile and criminal court judges handling the case nor any automatic
exchange of records or information between the two systems.

o Cases involving child abuse and neglect were handled in an idiosyncratic
fashion. 

Findings from the case study of a county that aggressively prosecutes
cases of child physical abuse are presented in the summary of a National
Institute of Justice Research in Brief, The Prosecution of Child Physical
Abuse Cases: A Case Study in San Diego, which appears elsewhere in this
document.

Findings from the prospective study of the tracking of child maltreatment
cases in one jurisdiction showed that:

o Sexual abuse cases had the highest predicted level of criminal
prosecution.

o Cases involving female victims were more likely to be criminally
prosecuted than those involving male victims.

o Cases involving victims ages 7 to 12 were much more likely to be
prosecuted than cases involving older or younger children.

o Physical neglect cases were the most likely to result in dependency court
filings.

o Multiple relationships, that is, offenders who had abused their own
children as well as another child, were most likely to result in prosecution.

Implications for Improving Case Processing

The researchers offered the following recommendations:

o The development of training system models suitable to different
environments may be the most effective approach to developing
management information and tracking systems in this field.

o Standard definitions for data elements would be useful.

o Implementation of practices and procedures to guide communication
strategies across agencies is needed.

o The formation of common goals would be an important step in
establishing interagency communication and trust.

o It is important to coordinate not only juvenile and criminal court
processing, but also other proceedings that may be related to these cases,
such as child support, domestic violence, custody, or divorce proceedings.

o Professionalizing law enforcement, child protective services agencies,
and prosecution, combined with manageable caseloads, may help improve
the coordination among the staff of these agencies. In addition, the
negative impact of frequent staff turnover needs to be addressed as a
deterrent to fostering coordination.

-------------------------------

Findings and Implications Drawn From 

Coordinating Criminal and Juvenile Court Proceedings in Child
Maltreatment Cases

by Debra Whitcomb and Mark Hardin[9]

Purpose of Research

To conduct a national assessment of the coordination of criminal and
juvenile court proceedings in child maltreatment cases. Intrafamilial child
maltreatment cases often involve simultaneous criminal and juvenile court
proceedings. The juvenile court handles the child protection proceeding,
which is designed to protect the child, assist the family, and provide the
child with a permanent home. The purpose of the criminal proceeding is to
protect the public, deter future crime, punish, and rehabilitate. Not only are
the goals of each proceeding different, but they can be incompatible,
inefficient, and detrimental to the child and family. For example, when
juvenile court actions precede the criminal matter, as is customarily the
case, the alleged offenders are at risk. Information they provide to comply
with juvenile court treatment plans, such as their involvement with
therapy, can be used against them in subsequent prosecutions.

Methods

Two research components were employed in this study: (1) a nationally
representative telephone survey of prosecutors and child protection
attorneys and (2) site visits to four jurisdictions. For the phone survey, 150
counties were sampled with two primary respondents in each county: a
prosecutor with responsibility for criminal child maltreatment cases and an
attorney representing the child protection agency. Overall, 103 prosecutors
and 59 child protection attorneys responded to the phone survey. Four
counties were chosen for indepth court coordination study: Chittenden
County (Burlington), Vermont; Tompkins County (Ithaca), New York;
Santa Clara County (San Jose), California; and Hawaii County (Hilo and
Kona), Hawaii.

Findings

Research from the phone survey revealed:

o A high proportion of respondents were satisfied with the degree of
coordination between the two systems and their efforts to achieve this
level of coordination.

o Responding prosecutors estimated that 60 percent of their child
maltreatment cases were concurrently involved in juvenile court
proceedings. Sexual abuse was the offense category most likely to be
involved in both courts.

o Approximately half the attorneys surveyed indicated that dual court
cases proceed independently, with no consideration given to case status in
the other court.

o There was little concern, particularly among prosecutors, about the need
to coordinate between the criminal court and the juvenile court. Some
respondents felt that efforts to coordinate would even be inappropriate or
counterproductive.

o Survey respondents reported that coordination of cases, which resulted
in increased knowledge of cases, had an impact on litigation strategies
such as deciding whether or not to pursue a case or negotiate pleas.

o Prosecutors from larger counties were less satisfied with coordination
than prosecutors from smaller communities.

Visits to the four sites found:

o The exchange of information between juvenile courts and criminal
courts was hampered by confidentiality rules.

o Inconsistent court orders occur infrequently in all four jurisdictions
because defense attorneys represent the alleged offender in both courts;
probation officers incorporate juvenile court orders into their presentence
investigation reports to the criminal court; and criminal court judges
mention juvenile court orders in their own orders involving pretrial release
or probation.

o Juvenile court proceedings usually proceeded faster than related criminal
cases. Respondents were dissatisfied with the conflicting goals of the two
courts (rehabilitation/reunification vs. punishment/retribution). Defense
counsels were dissatisfied with the statutory protections available to their
clients. They regarded "testimonial immunity" statutes (which allow
alleged perpetrators to speak freely without fearing that their statements
will be used against them in criminal court) as inadequate protection and
often advised clients not to testify in juvenile court or participate in
therapy. 

Based on the study findings, the researchers concluded:

o Although coordination is not consistent across jurisdictions, many
agencies work well together during the investigative process.

o It is very important that there be coordination in the litigation between
the criminal and juvenile court. With increased coordination between the
two types of proceedings comes a decrease in inconsistent and conflicting
orders.

o Counsel for the child protection agency and the criminal prosecutor must
communicate in order to have successful coordination in child
maltreatment proceedings.

Implications for Criminal Justice and Child Protection Authorities

Certain child maltreatment-related cases should be coordinated in the
criminal and juvenile courts for several reasons:

o To ensure that both courts have access to complete information.

o To decrease the likelihood of conflicting or inconsistent court orders.

o To avoid unnecessary trauma to child victims.

o To address the conflict that arises when alleged offenders are denied
treatment under juvenile court plans for fear that admissions will be used
against them in criminal court.

Criminal justice and child protection authorities can increase their
coordination by:

o Creating a detailed procedure for working together.

o Establishing good working relationships between counsels.

o Creating multidisciplinary councils and teams.

o Mandating interagency coordination, cooperation, and collaboration.

o Increasing judicial awareness of parallel proceedings in child abuse and
neglect cases.

-------------------------------

SENTENCING

 Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

The Probation Response to Child Sexual Abuse Offenders: How Is it
Working?

by Barbara E. Smith, Susan W. Hillenbrand, and Sharon R. Goretsky[10]

Purpose of Research

To explore what court-ordered probation in child sexual abuse cases
means in terms of prosecution, sentencing, supervision, treatment, and
revocation or success rates. Previous studies had shown that probation is a
common or perhaps even the primary sentence for persons convicted of
child sexual abuse.

Methods

The study employed two methods: (1) a national telephone survey of chief
probation officers in 100 randomly selected counties, supplemented by a
mail survey of State directors of probation or other relevant State
representatives, and (2) site visits to Travis County, Texas; Salt Lake
County, Utah; St. Joseph County, Indiana; and the State of Maine for
discussions with more than 60 judges, probation officers, prosecutors,
defense attorneys, therapists, and victim advocates.

Findings

Telephone and mail survey results revealed:

o Fewer than half of the county probation departments had special
regulations or guidelines for dealing with probationers convicted of child
sexual abuse.

o Probation caseloads were too high to supervise child sexual abuse
probationers adequately.

o Staff training on child sexual abuse was often inadequate, and relatively
few probation departments had specialized units to deal with these cases.

o The average probation sentence in a majority of the jurisdictions was 3
to 5 years, a period thought "about right" by the chief probation officers.

o Most probation officers were satisfied with the specificity judges used in
ordering special conditions.

o Psychological counseling was the special condition most often ordered.
"Stay away" orders were also common.

o Public mental health programs commonly provided psychological
treatment, although private counselors were also frequently used.

o Few jurisdictions had sufficient numbers of good treatment programs,
either for those who were indigent or for those with the means to pay. Few
departments had standards for treatment programs.

o Most child sexual abuse probationers were required to report to their
probation officers in person; surprise and collateral contacts were also
common.

o Few child sexual abusers were brought back to court for reoffending or
other "major" violations.

Practitioner interview results revealed:

o There was no consensus about whether individuals who sexually abuse
children within the nuclear (or extended) family should be treated
differently than other child sexual abusers.

o Most child sexual abuse cases were handled by negotiated plea rather
than by trial.

o Judges usually followed the sentencing recommendations in the
presentence report.

o Offenders thought to be amenable to treatment (i.e., those who admitted
to at least some sort of abuse) were likely to be sentenced to probation,
sometimes accompanied by short periods of shock incarceration in a local
jail. Those who denied the abuse were likely to receive prison sentences.

o There was no consensus as to the optimal length of probation (the
shortest was 2 years, the longest 10). Practitioners in jurisdictions with
shorter probation sentences tended to think that all that could be done for
the offender could be accomplished in several years. Those in jurisdictions
with longer probation sentences tended to think that lengthier supervision
would at least reduce reoffending for a longer time, and might even extend
the length of time between the end of probation and reoffense. Regardless
of the length of probation, however, there was little confidence that abuse
would not reoccur after probation terminated and probationers were no
longer closely watched.

o By far, the most common offense-specific condition of probation was
treatment for the offender's sexual orientation to children. Orders to stay
away from the victim or other minor children were also common.

o Residential halfway houses were used in two of the sites; intensive or
maximum supervision was used in all, at least initially. Such supervision
included collateral contacts with the probationer's employer, therapist,
family members, and associates; unannounced visits to the probationer's
home or place of employment; and frequent in-person meetings between
the probation officer and the probationer.

o Specialized probation officers with reduced caseloads and some training
on issues relating to child sexual abuse supervised child sexual abuse
probationers in three of the sites.

o Child sexual abuse probationers were generally required to sign waivers
of confidentiality allowing their probation officers to receive progress
reports from treatment providers and to obtain otherwise confidential
information from employers and government agencies.

o Lack of treatment alternatives and long waiting lists were common.
Almost universally, practitioners cited the need for more therapists and
more alternative therapy settings--in halfway houses, prisons, and jails.

o Coordination between the treatment provider and probation officer was
considered critical to the successful treatment of the offender;
unfortunately, such coordination was often precluded by probation
officers' heavy caseloads.

Based on their study findings, the researchers concluded:

o Child sexual abuse probationers require special supervision by probation
officers.

o Close coordination between probation officers and treatment providers is
important.

o A variety of sentencing options and approaches are necessary to address
the needs of all child sexual abuse offenders.

o "Successful" and "unsuccessful" termination of probation and treatment
needs to be better defined and documented.

Implications for all Criminal Justice Officials

Prosecutors, defense attorneys, judges, and probation officers should
inform themselves or be trained about available treatment options,
eligibility requirements, treatment regimens, and waiting lists of various
programs, both in the community and in correctional facilities.

Implications for Judges

Judges faced with the uncomfortable sentencing choice of treatment
without incarceration or incarceration without treatment might consider
short-term shock incarceration, followed by probation with treatment.
(Shock incarceration was a system whereby judges would sentence
offenders to a lengthy prison term and then bring them back to court after
several months were served. At that point, offenders would be asked if
they have had sufficient time to contemplate the severity of their crime and
its affect on their victims. If they responded affirmatively, they would be
offered the chance to be placed on probation in lieu of returning to prison.)

Implications for Probation Officials

Probation departments could establish specialized units to monitor child
sexual abuse offenders. These units would:

o Reduce caseloads to allow more careful monitoring.

o Establish guidelines for frequent contact between the probationer and the
probation officer, including surprise visits and collateral contacts with the
probationer's therapist, employer, family members, and associates.

o Provide intensive training on issues related to child sexual abuse and the
monitoring of abusers.

Probation departments and officers could:

o Require probationers to sign confidentiality waivers to facilitate access
to relevant information and allow meaningful communication between
treatment providers and probation officers.

o Receive joint training with treatment providers to clarify roles and
responsibilities and to establish mutually advantageous interactions.

o Communicate with probationers' therapists frequently, by telephone,
written communication, and in-person meetings.

o Maintain and distribute to judges and treatment providers statistics on
the number of child sexual abuse probationers who successfully and
unsuccessfully terminate their periods of probation, including reasons for
unsuccessful terminations.

-------------------------------

Findings and Implications Drawn From

Managing Adult Sex Offenders in the Community--A Containment
Approach

by Kim English, Suzanne Pullen, and Linda Jones[11]

Purpose of Research

To identify how probation and parole agencies manage adult sex offenders
and develop a model process for managing adult sex offenders in the
community.

Methods

The study had two primary components: a telephone survey and field
research. The telephone survey was administered to probation and parole
supervisors in 49 States and the District of Columbia. The field research
included more than 100 interviews in 13 jurisdictions in Arizona,
Colorado, Louisiana, Ohio, Oregon, and Texas. Interviews were conducted
with probation and parole officers, defense and prosecuting attorneys, law
enforcement personnel, social services workers, sex offender treatment
providers, sexual assault victim treatment providers, polygraph examiners,
judges, correctional administrators, parole authorities, victim advocates,
and sex offenders. In addition to the phone survey and field interviews, a
literature review on victim trauma and sex offender management and
treatment, a legal analysis of sex offender statutes in 50 States, and a
review of documents such as manuals, protocols, and policies were
conducted. This research examined the probation and parole response to
adult sex offenders whose victims are children as well as adults. Many of
these findings and recommendations apply particularly to adults who
sexually abuse children. 

Findings

Telephone survey results indicated:

o In 1994, about one-third of the probation and parole agencies had
specialized caseloads for managing sex offenders.

o Agencies with specialized caseloads were more likely than other
agencies to report a philosophy focusing on victim safety and the use of
community safety-related approaches such as special supervision
conditions and after-hours monitoring of offenders.

Research into the model process found:

o Public safety, victim protection, and reparation for victims are important
components of the model process for managing and containing sex
offenders on probation or parole.

o There are three elements of supervision that make up the model
community containment process: 

--Treatment to assist the offender in developing internal controls over
deviant thoughts.

--Supervision of the offender by probation and parole officers to exert
external controls.

--Polygraph examinations to obtain complete sexual history information
and monitor the offender's behavior for treatment and supervision
compliance.

o The model process employs a multidisciplinary approach to dealing with
sex offender management.

o The model process recommends clear and consistent public policies.

o The model process includes quality control to monitor current policies
and practices and to evaluate the impact of the policies and practices.

Implications

Researchers drew several implications from their findings:

o Professionals who work with sex offenders may experience secondary
trauma, that is, emotional or psychological effects on professionals who
work with difficult populations such as sex offenders. To deal with
secondary trauma, organizations and agencies should provide a safe
environment staffed by personnel who understand secondary trauma and
the dynamics of sex offenders. Professionals who work with sex offenders
would need to receive direct training as well as cross-training among
different agencies on a regular basis.

o The model process should be tailored to the needs of each community.
However, the most important factor--public and victim safety--must
always be a high priority.

o Supervision plans should be individualized for each offender and the
offender's particular risks.

o Individualized supervision plans should restrict or bar certain activities
that provide access to victims.

o Short-term sanctions should be developed for sex offenders who engage
in high-risk behavior. These could include short-term mental health and
jail holds, extra counseling, halfway house confinement, and fines.

o Agencies and organizations that deal with sex offenses should
communicate and collaborate with each other.

o Sex offenders who are under supervision should be required to
participate in approved treatment programs.

o For some sex offenders, long-term or lifetime supervision sentences
should be considered.

-------------------------------

IMPACT OF DOMESTIC VIOLENCE ON CHILDREN'S BEHAVIOR

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From 

Children of Battered Women: The Relation of Child Behavior to Family
Violence and Maternal Stress

by David A. Wolfe, Peter Jaffe, Susan Kaye Wilson, and Lydia Zak[12]

Purpose of Research

To measure the impact of domestic violence on children in terms of
behavior problems and social competence.

Methods

The study included 142 mothers and 198 children ranging from 4 to 16
years of age. Comparisons were made between 102 children in violent
families drawn from shelters and 96 children from nonviolent families
drawn from the community. For the mothers, the assessment measures
were the amount of physical violence between partners; the degree of
maternal stress and adjustment as measured by the mother's symptoms of
emotional and physical health problems; negative life events; and three
sociodemographic factors--changes in residences, number of marital
separations in the past 2 years, and use of community services to assess
the level of family crises. For the children, the assessment measure was a
checklist with a parental rating of 20 social competence items and 118
behavior problems.

Findings

The study showed that:

o Significantly more children from violent families scored higher on
behavior and competency problems than did children from nonviolent
families. In fact, children from violent families had a rate of behavior and
social competency problems 2.5 times higher than those from nonviolent
families. More than one-quarter of the children from violent families had
problems severe enough to fall into the clinical range.

o The association between behavior and social competency problems
between those in violent versus nonviolent families was especially strong
for boys.

o Children in violent families who were exposed to a higher frequency and
intensity of physical violence and whose mothers reported more negative
life events, scored higher on behavior and social competency problems
than children with lower frequency and intensity of physical violence and
whose mothers reported fewer negative life events.

Implications for Prosecutors

Domestic violence victims should be asked whether their children are
experiencing behavior and competency problems. For those who are,
prosecutors should refer the mother to victim assistance, crisis providers,
and other support services so that the children's needs are not overlooked.

Implications for Victim Assistance

When providing services to domestic violence victims, inquiries should be
made on how the children are coping. Efforts to assist mothers will have a
positive bearing on children. Appropriate referrals to short- and long-term
services should be made.

-------------------------------

OTHER

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

Parental Drug Testing in Child Abuse and Neglect Cases: The
Washington, D.C., Experience

by Lisa C. Newmark[13]

Purpose of Research

To provide insight on when parental drug testing was conducted in child
abuse and neglect cases and to examine client and court outcomes
associated with its use.

Methods

The Family Division of the District of Columbia Superior Court has civil
jurisdiction over children named in child maltreatment petitions. The D.C.
Family Court judges began referring abuse and neglect cases for drug
testing in 1987 to assist courts and social services in identifying and
addressing treatment needs. The court's goal is to promote child safety as
well as family preservation.

The research compared a matched sample of 169 drug-involved cases that
entered the drug testing program from October 1, 1989, to December 31,
1990, with a similar group of 159 drug-involved cases from the same
period that did not enter the drug testing program.

Findings

The study identified case services and dispositions that may be associated
with the testing program. The author cautions that conclusions are
preliminary in light of research methodology limitations. The study found
that cases in which the parent(s) participated in drug testing (compared to
those that did not), were more likely to experience the following
outcomes:

o More frequent court hearings over a shorter time and a shorter overall
case processing time.

o Children placed more often with the primary caregiver or other family
member than in foster homes or institutions.

o More service referrals to caregivers for drug treatment, child-oriented
services, and housing and other basic needs.

o Greater monitoring of visitation, as indicated by the court's practice to
grant, revoke, or deny visitation rights.

o Increased parental cooperation with referrals for diagnostic services.

Implications for the Criminal Justice System

Drug testing seems to be a promising tool for courts and social services to
use in working with child maltreatment cases in which parents are
substance abusers. Testing was associated with achieving a number of the
courts' and social services agencies' goals, including identifying treatment
needs and making service referrals, using family placements and a
monitored parental visitation program, and reunifying families.

Other jurisdictions interested in implementing a testing program can
benefit from the District of Columbia's experience. When developing such
a program, it is critical to enroll the support of all relevant agencies and
establish a coordinated approach with strong channels of communication.
Policies should be developed, monitored, and revised as needed on
specific operational issues, such as testing logistics, case selection and
referral mechanisms, testing schedules, program registration,
recordkeeping and reporting, and monitoring and sanctioning
noncompliance and "dirty" test results.

Jurisdictions interested in implementing drug-testing programs also need
to plan for the court and social service resources required by such
programs. These include:

o Court resources. Testing appears to be associated with more frequent
court hearings and shorter case processing times. Courts may need to
allocate resources for a more intense approach to case processing.

o Case management services. Children of tested parents were placed more
frequently with their parents and less frequently in foster homes than were
children of nontested parents. As a result, more extensive services may be
required for reunited families in order to monitor progress, protect child
safety, and promote healthier family functioning in the long term.

o Service referrals. Increased referrals to several types of services, not just
drug treatment services, were associated with testing. Jurisdictions should
allocate sufficient resources to meet the needs of referred cases and courts
should coordinate anticipated demands with treatment professionals in the
community. This is especially important given that judges and case
managers said that inadequate levels of services for drug abuse and other
family problems is the biggest obstacle to the restoration of functional
families.

o Case disposition. There was some evidence that testing is associated
with family reunification rather than adoption or termination of parental
rights. Should this occur in other jurisdictions implementing drug testing
programs, a plan for extensive aftercare services should be implemented to
reduce the incidence of repeat maltreatment and the recycling of these
cases through the system.

-------------------------------

Chapter Two: Research on Legal Interventions in Elder Abuse Cases

While elder abuse has not been examined as extensively as spousal
violence and child abuse, research over the past decade has shed some
light on elder abuse and resulted in recommendations for improving the
response to this problem. However, there is a critical need for more
research in this area. This chapter examines studies on the coordination
and collaboration between social service and criminal justice systems, as
well as research-based recommendations for State courts when dealing
with elder abuse.

Coordination and Collaboration

Collaborative and coordinated responses by the various relevant public
and private agencies have become increasingly popular strategies when
addressing complicated social problems. The two studies presented in this
chapter examine working relationships between the social services system
and the criminal justice system. The first examines the extent to which
formal and informal protocols and joint training exist among State adult
protective agencies and law enforcement agencies in 45 States. The second
study examines interagency protocols in an effort to improve
communication between agencies, increase referrals, and facilitate service
plans for victims. In both studies, communication, coordination, and
collaboration between social service agencies and the criminal justice
system are viewed as having a positive impact on elder abuse services. To
facilitate this positive impact, practitioners need to be aware of legislation
and existing protocols between agencies; to improve existing protocols, as
necessary; and to establish protocols where there are none.

Recommendations to State Courts 

The last article focuses on developing knowledge about judicial handling
of elder abuse cases and using that knowledge to develop recommended
guidelines to help courts. Twenty-nine recommendations are made as to
ways that State courts can improve their handling of elder abuse cases,
ensure that these cases enter the court system, and coordinate the judicial
system with other community resources. Specific recommendations
include:

o Providing training on elder abuse issues for judges.

o Making courts more flexible to accommodate the special needs of the
elderly.

o Encouraging the formation or continuation of multidisciplinary,
interagency task forces on elder abuse.

o Including elder abuse experts on court advisory councils.

o Making victim/witness advocates or other court staff available to help
victims throughout the court process in both criminal and civil
proceedings.

-------------------------------

COORDINATION AND COLLABORATION

Findings and Implications Drawn From 

Working Relationships Between Adult Protective Services, Aging
Agencies, and Law Enforcement Agencies--A Short-Term Project

by Toshio Tatara and Margaret Rittman1

Purpose of Research

To examine the nature of the working relationships that State adult
protective service (APS) units and State units on aging have with law
enforcement agencies in handling domestic and institutional elder abuse
cases; to obtain information about formal protocols or agreements that
State and/or local aging and APS units have with law enforcement
agencies; and to obtain information about joint training, research, or public
education programs.

Methods

Beginning in August 1991, survey questionnaires were sent to the APS
and aging agencies in each of the States, two territories, and the District of
Columbia. Agencies in 45 of these jurisdictions returned completed forms.

Findings

Results from the survey questionnaires were analyzed from two
perspectives: domestic elder abuse and institutional elder abuse.

The survey on domestic elder abuse revealed:

o The majority of States (36 of 45 jurisdictions) have laws mandating law
enforcement involvement in handling domestic elder abuse cases (e.g.,
investigations and home visits for evidence gathering). 

o The law enforcement agencies most often required to be involved are the
police (22 of 45), local prosecutor (21), sheriff (20), and court (18). One or
more responding jurisdictions require involvement by the State's attorney,
attorney general, district attorney, coroner, county protective services, and
county probation officers. 

o Few States (3 of 45) have formal protocols between State APS or aging
agencies and State law enforcement; local protocols are somewhat more
common (14 of 45), but still relatively rare.

o Regardless of whether or not formal protocols exist between APS/aging
and law enforcement agencies, in the majority of States, these agencies
regularly work together (31 of 45) and undertake joint training, public
education, and research activities (31 of 45). Law enforcement agencies or
officials most likely to participate in joint activities are the police, the
sheriff, the attorney general, medicaid fraud control unit, court, and the
district attorney.

The survey on institutional elder abuse revealed:

o The majority of States (32 of 45) have laws mandating law enforcement
involvement in handling institutional elder abuse cases.

o Law enforcement agencies or officials most frequently required to be
involved are police (17 of 45), local prosecutor (17), sheriff (14), and court
(10). One or more States require involvement of the attorney general,
State's attorney, county protective services unit, coroner, and medicaid
fraud control unit.

o Formal protocols are rare at both the State level (9 of 45) and the local
level (4).

o In about half the States, law enforcement works with APS/aging
agencies (23 of 45) and participates with them in other activities (21). 

o In about half the States, law enforcement works with APS/aging
agencies (23 of 45) and participates with them in other activities (21). 

Implications for Law Enforcement [these implications are not explicit in
the report but appear evident from the survey results.]

The following conclusions were drawn:

o Law enforcement officials should be aware of existing legislation
mandating their involvement with APS/aging agencies and protocols for
implementing such involvement.

o Where protocols do not exist or where they are ineffective, law
enforcement officials should work with APS/aging agencies to establish or
improve such protocols.

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

Collaboration Between Protective Services and Law Enforcement: The
Massachusetts Model

by Donna M. Reulbach and Jane Tewksbury[2]



Purpose of Research

To develop, test, and refine interagency protocols regarding elder abuse,
neglect, and financial exploitation; improve communication and flow of
information between the protective services agency and law enforcement;
increase cross-agency referrals; and facilitate development of service plans
to support victims throughout the criminal justice process.

Methods

The development of the Middlesex County Guidelines for Handling Elder
Abuse Referrals was a collaborative effort of Massachusetts Protective
Services and the Middlesex County District Attorney's Office. This
collaborative effort involved reviewing cases referred to the district
attorney and examining their outcome in terms of satisfaction of the
district attorney, the protective services agency, and the victim; agreeing
upon common language, terms, and concepts; cross-training of both
front-line and supervisory police, and prosecutorial, victim/witness, and
protective service personnel about the requirements and implications of
mandatory reporting; and developing and testing guidelines focusing on
mandatory reporting requirements of statutes and regulations. 

Findings

Historically, there has been considerable mistrust and little cooperation
between the social services and criminal justice systems. The study results
showed:

o Despite statutory mandatory reporting requirements, protective services
personnel often failed to report elder abuse and neglect to the district
attorney. Many protective services workers believed that such reports
would necessarily result in criminal prosecution and probably
incarceration of the perpetrator/caregiver. In fact, however, not all reports
resulted in criminal prosecution and not all prosecutions resulted in
incarceration. Moreover, inadequate reporting by protective services
personnel often resulted in lost or destroyed physical evidence.

o When protective services did refer cases to the district attorney's office,
there was often inadequate followup by either side, that is:

--The district attorney's office often failed to investigate to see if criminal
charges could be brought.

--Protective services rarely requested to be kept apprised of how the
prosecutor's office was going to proceed--information that was critical to
the development of an appropriate service plan for the victim.

o Despite statutory mandatory requirements that police report elder abuse
and neglect to the protective services agency, police rarely did so.
Consequently, protective services was unable to provide needed services
to victims, initiate alternative interventions when criminal prosecutions
would not go forth, or develop victim safety plans to support victims
through the criminal justice process.

Conclusions

Based on case reviews, interagency guidelines were developed,
field-tested, and--after extensive cross-training of Protective Services and
law enforcement staff--implemented. From this process researchers
concluded:

o A coordinated multidisciplinary effort to develop and implement
interagency protocols can increase case referral, improve interagency
communication, and result in better investigations and more timely
prosecutions.

o The development and cultivation of personal contacts among all of the
involved agencies is an essential ingredient of effective interagency
cooperation and collaboration.

o Protocols would:

--Clearly define the types of cases protective services should refer to the
prosecutor.

--Specify who on the prosecutorial staff is to receive referrals.

--Detail the steps the prosecutor's office should take upon receiving such
referrals, emphasizing timeliness.

--Specify the types of information protective services and prosecutors
should share with each other.

o The process of developing protocols can also result in the identification
of statutory or regulatory obstacles to interagency cooperation. For
example, in addition to developing the Guidelines, the project's
collaborators:

--Drafted and filed with the legislature a criminal neglect bill.

--Successfully sought an amendment of protective services legislation to
include financial exploitation as a reportable condition.

--Obtained modification of protective services requirements so as to allow
law enforcement to assume early and exclusive jurisdiction in
investigating cases involving the death of the victim. 

Implications for Law Enforcement and Prosecutors 

Experience with the Massachusetts model resulted in several
recommendations to improve the response to elder abuse and neglect
cases:

o Supervisory and front-line personnel in the police department,
prosecutor's office, and the protective services agency should participate in
and coordinate their agency's efforts.

o Police should report elder abuse, neglect, and financial exploitation to
the protective services agency.

o Prosecutors should keep the protective services agency advised about
how specific cases are proceeding so that it can:

--Deliver needed services to victims.

--Arrange for alternative interventions to protect victims when prosecution
will not go forth.

--Develop victim safety plans to support victims through the criminal
justice process when prosecution will go forth.

o Prosecutors should maintain close coordination with protective services
to:

--Clarify whether or not specific cases should be referred to the prosecutor
and what the procedure is for handling cases referred by protective
services.

--Encourage reporting of elderly abuse cases that might warrant criminal
prosecution.

--Obtain assistance in securing information or testimony from intimidated
victims. 

--Obtain useful information about the facts and circumstances of the
reported prosecutorial handling of specific cases. 

o The prosecutorial screening function should be centralized and should
encourage consultation with protective services workers who are unsure
about the suitability of referral in specific cases. Screeners can also serve
as troubleshooters to field complaints from protective services about
prosecutorial handling of specific cases. The prosecutor should encourage
protective services to establish a parallel position to field complaints from
prosecutors.

-------------------------------

RECOMMENDATIONS TO STATE COURTS

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

Recommended Guidelines for State Courts Handling Cases Involving
Elder Abuse

by Lori A. Stiegel[3]

Purpose of Research

To develop a base of knowledge about judicial handling of cases involving
elder abuse and to use that knowledge to develop recommended guidelines
to help courts provide judicial solutions that respect the values and wishes
of elder abuse victims while protecting their welfare; ease access of
appropriate cases to the court system; and enhance coordination among the
court system and public and private agencies serving abused elders.

Methods

The project involved: (1) review and analysis of relevant civil and criminal
statutes, case law, and legal and social sciences literature; (2) two Delphi
consensus-building surveys completed by 214 and 170 respondents,
respectively, including judges, court administrators, legal services, private
attorneys, prosecutors, adult protective services and social services
personnel, staff from Medicaid fraud control units and State attorney's
general offices, health care providers, long-term care ombudsman program
staff, researchers, and victim/witness advocates; (3) development, expert
advisory committee review, and revision of draft recommendations based
on survey issues that elicited at least 75 percent "consensus"; and (4)
continual review of proposed recommendations by nine focus groups
representing relevant national organizations.

Findings

Criminal court involvement in elder abuse cases is appropriate when:

o The case involves criminal intent, criminal neglect, or a crime
committed in a nursing home that would be prosecuted if committed on
the street.

o The alleged offender is a public guardian, a person with a history of
abusive behavior, a caregiver, or someone who violated protective orders.

o The abused elder is mentally ill or mentally impaired.

o The abuse involved severe physical harm or injury or sexual abuse.

Noncriminal court involvement in elder abuse cases is appropriate when:

o The case involves abandonment, domestic violence, fiduciary abuse,
elder abuse within a Medicaid-certified nursing facility; emotional,
psychological, or mental abuse; financial exploitation; improper
institutionalization; sexual abuse; theft by a caregiver; or severe harm or
death.

o The alleged abuser is a guardian or caregiver.

o A protective order or injunction is needed to stop the abuse.

o An incapacitated older person refuses to accept protective services.

Barriers inhibiting entry of elder abuse cases into the courts include certain
concerns or beliefs of abused elders such as:

o Reluctance to get family members or caretakers in trouble.

o Dependence on abusers for companionship or care.

o Fear that court involvement will result in their removal from the home.

o Fear of testifying and shame in airing their abuse in court.

o Lack of knowledge about legal remedies.

o Logistical problems in getting to and spending time in court.

o Belief that court intervention will not prevent further abuse or
retaliation.

Barriers inhibiting entry of elder abuse cases into the courts include certain
institutional barriers such as:

o Judges' insensitivity and ignorance about elder abuse, which inhibits
lawyers, prosecutors, and abused persons from bringing cases.

o Court delays that result in elders' forgetting about the abuse or in the
lessening of their ability to recall information about it.

o Lack of knowledge by prosecutors, lawyers, and law enforcement
officers about handling elder abuse cases.

o Lack of coordination between adult protective service workers and law
enforcement.

Implications for Judges

The project developed a total of 29 recommendations on ways State courts
can improve their handling of elder abuse cases, ensure that elder abuse
cases enter the court system, and coordinate the judicial system functions
with that of other community resources. Among these:

o Judges should be trained about the dynamics of elder abuse and family
violence, relevant laws, available services for elder abuse victims, and
effective handling of elder abuse cases. Training should include
cross-training with other relevant professionals.

o In handling elder abuse cases, judges should make accommodations for
victims with physical and mental deficiencies, be flexible in scheduling
hearings to accommodate needs of elderly victims, and expedite cases.

o If the capacity of elder abuse victims is an issue, judges should use
experts trained and knowledgeable about the problems of older persons to
assess capacity. In noncriminal proceedings involving incapacitated
victims, judges should use guardians and alternatives to guardianship
appropriately and ensure that, when one is to be used, an appointed
counsel is assigned as early as possible. In criminal proceedings involving
incapacitated victims, judges should allow prosecutors special latitude in
questioning victims, and ensure that plea negotiations and sentences meet
the victims' needs. 

o Courts should establish intracourt communication systems to ensure that
judges hearing elder abuse cases are aware of related cases that have been
previously heard or are underway in different divisions.

o Judges should encourage the formation or continuation of
multidisciplinary, interagency task forces on elder abuse, and have elder
abuse experts serve on court advisory councils.

Implications for Victim/Witness Advocates and Court Staff

Victim/witness advocates or other court staff should assist older abused
persons throughout the court process in both criminal and noncriminal
proceedings.

Victim/witness advocates need to learn about the dynamics of elder abuse,
the jurisdiction's adult protective services, and resources offered by other
network services for the elderly.

-------------------------------

Chapter Three: Research on Legal Interventions in Domestic Violence
Cases

As public awareness about the prevalence and nature of spouse and partner
violence has increased, so too has public demand that the justice system
step in to stop the violence, rather than continue to treat it as a private
matter between consenting adults. Accordingly, police, prosecutors,
probation officers, and judges are using or adapting various strategies to
this end. Researchers have examined some of these strategies, including
civil protection orders, arrest and prosecution, and court-ordered treatment
of offenders. At the same time, research has shed increasing light on
characteristics common to batterers.[1]

Batterer Characteristics

Justice system practitioners must have at least a general understanding of
the nature of batterers to be able to deal with them effectively and to
protect their victims from further violence. Two of the studies summarized
in this chapter specifically sought to identify characteristics predictive of
domestic violence. Although their methods differ considerably, both
conclude that criminal history, history of mental illness, and use of alcohol
and drugs are among the common characteristics of batterers. (These and
other batterer characteristics are also included among the findings of
several other studies summarized in this chapter under other headings.) 

Civil Protection Orders

Restraining orders have been touted as workable and preferable
alternatives to criminal proceedings or useful tools in conjunction with
criminal proceedings in domestic violence cases. They also have been
criticized as ineffective or, worse, as providing false comfort to victims
who rely on them. 

The four studies on civil protection orders explore the benefits and
limitations of issuing and enforcing such orders, assess their impact in
reducing abusive behavior and improving the quality of women's lives,
and provide some insight into abusers against whom restraining orders are
issued and their future risk of abuse. Generally, the studies find that civil
protection orders have important, but limited, value to victims. Restraining
orders can provide immediate relief from the violence and enhance
victims' self-esteem. However, they are rarely effective in reducing future
violence unless accompanied by safety planning and other community
services,[2] or when, as is commonly the case, the batterers have a history
of severe violence or are substance abusers. Not surprisingly, protection
orders also have been found to be ineffective when not promptly served or
effectively enforced on the abuser. Given the limitations of civil protection
orders, several of the studies recommend that domestic violence cases be
prosecuted as well, and one study recommends that prosecution be "no
drop."[3]

Arrest

One of the most widely implemented--but controversial--efforts to deal
with domestic violence in recent years has been the adoption of proarrest
or mandatory arrest policies.[4] Some believe such policies are necessary
to convince batterers that, regardless of the relationship between the
parties, violence is a crime. Others believe proarrest policies only confirm
victims' sense of powerlessness over their own lives. The research projects
described show how the numerous variables associated with arresting
batterers can complicate the evaluation of these policies, and lead to some
different conclusions. Generally, however, the studies find that mandatory
arrest as a deterrent to future violence works better for some perpetrators
than for others, and that it is more effective in the short term than in the
long run. Several also argue that deterrence should not be the only value
on which mandatory arrest is judged.

Prosecution

The prosecution studies described in this volume shed light on various
aspects of prosecuting domestic violence cases. The first study concerns a
survey of how these cases are handled in large jurisdictions, that is, what
sort of domestic violence cases prosecutors handle, how cases come into
the office, and how they are dealt with in terms of pretrial release,
postcharge diversion, trial, and sentencing. The next study examines the
effectiveness of eight combinations of arrest and prosecution policies--
including a "no drop" option--in reducing renewed violence. It concludes
that victim involvement in decisionmaking can reduce the likelihood of
rebattering. Several others address evidence about battering--how it differs
from "the battered woman syndrome," how it should and should not be
used for defense or prosecution purposes, and current trends in statutes and
court decisions that recognize the validity of such evidence to supplement,
but not to supplant, more traditional forms of evidence.

Court-Ordered Treatment

Two studies summarized in this chapter address the effectiveness of
court-ordered treatment for reducing renewed violence by batterers. One
concludes that batterer treatment does not reduce the prevalence or
frequency of violence, while the other finds that integrated substance
abuse/batterer treatment programs are more effective in reducing battering
than separate treatment programs for battering and substance abuse.

Other

Finally, this section of the publication includes a study summary relating
to the corporate-sector response to domestic violence.

-------------------------------

Batterer and Victim Characteristics

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

Findings About Partner Violence From the Dunedin Multidisciplinary
Health and Development Study

by Terrie E. Moffitt, Avshalom Caspi, and Phil A. Silva[5]

Purpose of Research

To study the health and development of a complete cohort of infants born
between April 1, 1972, and March 31, 1973, in Dunedin on New Zealand's
South Island. The goal was to improve prediction, understanding, and
treatment of partner violence by studying the developmental experiences,
personal characteristics, and situational circumstances that lead individuals
into partner violence, and to help make policy to deter batterers through
arrest, prosecution, or therapy.

Methods

This research summary is part of the Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health
and Development Study, a 21-year study of a representative birth cohort.
The cohort was assessed at ages 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, 18, and 21. When
the cohort became 21 years old, the researchers embedded questions about
partner violence in a 50-minute standardized interview about intimate
relationships.

Findings

The section of the study on partner violence found that partner violence is
strongly associated with the following:

o Cohabitation at a young age.

o A variety of mental illnesses.

o A background of family adversity, leaving school early, and juvenile
aggression.

o Conviction for other types of crime, especially violent crime.

o Drug abuse.

o Long-term unemployment.

o Motherhood at a young age.

Implications for the Criminal Justice System

Based on the study results, the researchers concluded:

o Perpetrators of partner violence tend to be perpetrators of other violent
crimes. This finding may point to a need to coordinate policing and
judicial approaches to batterers. 

o Interventions should target teen mothers, to protect very young children
from high rates of exposure to family violence.

o Domestic violence should be a standard intake assessment in all public
mental health settings, to identify both perpetrators and victims before
injury brings them in contact with medical practitioners.

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

Florida Mortality Review Project: Executive Summary

by Byron Johnson, De Li, and Neil Websdale[6]

Purpose of Research

To construct "red flags" that might serve as bases to intervene and prevent
domestic fatalities.

Methods

Data sources included police records; court documents; autopsy reports;
newspaper accounts; hospital reports; and interviews with police, court
personnel, mental health workers, social service providers, and advocates
for battered women. Data were gathered on victim and perpetrator
characteristics, including gender, race, and relationship; "situational
antecedents" such as prior history of domestic violence, emotional or
mental difficulties, and acknowledged conflict in the relationship; and the
incident itself, including mode of killing, presence of other parties at the
scene, nonfatal wounding of others, and use of weapons, drugs, or alcohol.

While acknowledging the potential objection that the many variables of
domestic fatalities are inseparable and interwoven parts of an abusive
relationship, the researchers contend that breaking down the various
components allows for a determination of combinations of subcomponents
most likely associated with, and therefore predictive of, lethal domestic
situations.

Findings

Data sources revealed:

o Domestic fatalities for 1994 were under-reported by the Florida
Department of Law Enforcement. Whereas the official count was 230, the
study revealed 321 domestic fatalities, 281 of which were consistent with
the Florida domestic violence statute. Forty-seven of these domestic
fatalities were suicides within homicide-suicide incidents.[7]

o Of domestic homicide victims, nearly 95 percent of the women were
killed by men, while only a quarter of the men were killed by women.

o Domestic fatalities involving female victims were usually final events in
long-standing abusive relationships; this was not the case when the victims
were male.

o Women who killed men usually did so out of self-defense or, less often,
the defense of their children.

o The rate of domestic homicides perpetrated by women is considerably
higher for blacks than for whites or Latinos; the rate was lowest for
Latinos.

o Deaths of children resulting from abuse and/or neglect showed a strong
correlation with unmarried caretakers, poverty, and a history of physical
abuse.

o "Red flags" identified with the 1994 domestic fatalities in Florida were
as follows:

--Prior history of domestic violence in the relationship.

--Obsessive-possessive beliefs on the part of the perpetrator, that is, a
perpetrator's belief or sense of possession and total control over the victim.

--Threats to kill.

--Perpetrator belief of betrayal by partner, or morbid jealousy, including
departure from expected role.

--Victim attempts to break away.

--Prior police calls to the residence.

--Drug and/or alcohol use prior to the incident.

--Prior criminal histories of victims and perpetrators.

--History of mental illness or medical treatment of mental health problems.

Implications for Law Enforcement

Since prior police contact is a "red flag," it is critical that police document
the nature of their involvement with domestic violence incidents. Such
information can be used to screen high-risk cases. Police reports should
contain the following information:

o The names of the victims.

o History of prior violence.

o Police involvement, injunctions, and prior criminal histories.

o History of possessive beliefs, mental illness, and so forth.

Police could receive sensitivity training on the importance and
implications of the "red flags," [These implications are not explicit in the
executive summary but appear to follow from the findings.] including:

o Threats to kill an intimate partner or spouse, which need to be taken
seriously.

o Complaints from individuals who have obtained injunctions, left the
household, or previously summoned the police, which need to be given
priority attention. [These implications are not explicit in the executive
summary but appear to follow the findings.]

Police could work with judicial and social services groups to develop
plans for unusual and highly proactive interventions.

Implications for Judges

To improve their role in domestic violence interventions and thus prevent
fatalities, judges could:

o Be made aware of the existence and nature of "red flags" for domestic
fatalities and take them into consideration in fashioning specific conditions
in restraining orders and sentences.[These implications are not explicit in
the executive summary but appear to follow the findings.]

o Encourage recipients to develop safety plans and work with local
domestic violence agencies when issuing protective orders.[These
implications are not explicit in the executive summary but appear to
follow the findings.]

o Work with police and social services groups to develop plans for
unusual and highly proactive interventions.

-------------------------------

CIVIL PROTECTION ORDERS

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From 

Civil Protection Orders: Legislation, Current Court Practice, and
Enforcement

by Peter Finn and Sarah Colson[8]

Purpose of Research

To explore concerns involved in issuing and enforcing civil protection
orders.

Methods

Information was drawn from four sources: (1) a review of pertinent State
statutes and case law; (2) telephone interviews with 12 judges and 12
victim advocates; (3) examination of program documentation in Duluth,
Minnesota, and Seattle, Washington; (4) site visits to Portland, Maine;
Portland, Oregon; Springfield, Illinois; Chicago, Illinois; Nashville,
Tennessee; Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; and Colorado Springs, Colorado,
which included personal interviews with judges, prosecutors, law
enforcement officers, women's advocates, and battered women; courtroom
observation; and--in two of the sites--ride-alongs with police officers. 

Findings

Civil protection orders can provide:

o A workable alternative to criminal charges or an additional remedy for
many victims seeking protection from further domestic abuse. 

o Immediate relief to domestic violence victims. 

o An alternative form of relief where the level of evidence may not sustain
criminal charges or where the victim, for reasons of age, illness, or alcohol
or drug dependency, may be a weak prosecution witness. 

The utility of protection orders may depend on their specificity,
consistency of enforcement, and the ease with which they are obtained.
Serious limitations of civil protection orders include:

o Widespread lack of enforcement, even though such orders allow for
expansion of police arrest powers and increase the ability of police to
monitor repeat offenders. Uncertainty about enforcement of the orders on
the part of both police and judges.

o Common statutory weaknesses, including:

--Filing fees. 

--Lack of procedures and funds for training and supervising clerks to assist
petitioners seeking protection orders.

--Narrow eligibility categories.

--Lack of means of issuing emergency orders when courts are not in
session.

--Requirement of service to the defendant before the order becomes
effective, leaving victims unprotected until service has been made. 

--Failure to provide for case tracking to determine compliance. 

--Failure to provide law enforcement officers with adequate authorization
for arresting respondents who violate protection orders by designating
violations as civil (rather than criminal) contempt or misdemeanors or by
failing to provide for warrantless arrest for violations.

o Petition procedures that require the assistance of counsel. Even with a
simplified petitioning procedure and energetic lay assistance, victims not
represented by counsel are less likely to get protection orders. If an order
is issued, it is less likely to contain all appropriate provisions regarding
exclusion from the residence, temporary custody of children, child
support, and protective limitations on visitation rights.

Centralized court administration of domestic violence petitions reduces
postponements of hearings due to attorney absences and helps judges
develop specialized expertise in domestic violence cases. It also facilitates
matters for victims. On the other hand, full-time work on domestic
violence cases can be exhausting and "burnout" is likely.

Implications for Judges

The researchers offer several recommendations or points of consideration
to address concerns regarding civil protection orders and to improve
judges' effectiveness in issuing and enforcing such orders. These
recommendations are in the areas of guideline development and court
policies, victims' access to the petitioning process, information on the
victims' circumstances, and education about civil protection orders and
domestic abuse.

Guideline development. Judges can develop guidelines for when to issue
and how to enforce civil protection orders based on statutory
authorization, available case law, and local court procedures. 

Guidelines for issuing civil protection orders should:

o Ensure that such orders take into account a wide range of behaviors by
abusers.

o Include all statutorily authorized protections to meet the needs and
circumstances of the victims they are intended to protect.

o Include other appropriate forms of relief, which might include eviction
of the offender from the family home, no-contact provisions, denial of or
limitations on child custody and visitation by the offender, and mandatory
counseling for batterers. 

To address other concerns regarding issuing protection orders, judges can:

o Have clearly defined procedures for notice and hearing to address
concerns about defendants' due process rights in protection order
proceedings.

o Make protection orders as specific as possible so as to minimize doubt
by victims, respondents, law enforcement officials, and other judges about
abusers' proscribed behavior.

Guidelines for enforcing civil protection orders should:

o Clarify what procedures law enforcement officers are statutorily required
and authorized to follow and what procedures judges themselves will
follow in holding violation hearings. 

o Address distinctions between civil and criminal contempt as well as
probable cause requirements for warrantless arrests in connection with
violation of protection orders. 

o Address defendants' due process rights in enforcement proceedings and
sentencing considerations.

Even where statutory weaknesses exist, judges can establish a court policy
on enforcement of orders that includes: 

o Admonishing defendants.

o Establishing procedures for modifying orders.

o Promoting--as appropriate--the arrest of violators.

o Handling violators sternly. 

Judges should also ensure that law enforcement officers know that prompt
service of protection orders on respondents is a top priority.

Victims' access. Judges can play a key role in promoting victims' access to
counsel or the petitioning process, even where not explicitly mandated or
authorized by statute. Judges can: 

o Encourage local legal aid organizations, bar association pro bono
projects, and law school clinical programs to place a high priority on
representing victim petitioners.

o Provide training for victim advocates and meet regularly with victim
advocacy groups to address mutual problems and preview changes in court
procedures.

o Help train court clerks to improve their assistance to petitioners,
including:

--Ensuring that clerks have written instructions for assessing petitioners'
eligibility for protection orders under the State statute.

--Providing firm instructions not to assess petitioners' credibility.

--Advising them what course of action to follow or giving legal advice.

In addition, courts can assist victims who cannot secure legal counsel or
who prefer to proceed without counsel by providing simplified forms and
clerical assistance to help with the writing and filing of petitions. Judges
can ask questions of petitioners about what assistance is needed (e.g., child
support or alternative living arrangements) and about other matters that
should be taken into account, such as potential danger to children.

Information on victims' circumstances. Even when judges are not
statutorily required to hold a hearing prior to issuing a temporary
protection order, they may find it of value to inform themselves about the
victim's circumstances. Judges could:

o Speak with the petitioner to determine what dangers may exist and,
accordingly, what provisions need to be in the protection order to ensure
the safety of the petitioner and other members of the petitioner's
household.

o Inform the petitioner of the importance of appearing for the hearing on a
permanent order, and assess the petitioner's credibility and thus safeguard
the rights of the defendant. 

Judges may also find it valuable to gather information on the victim prior
to allowing dismissal of a temporary order or dismissing the proceedings
for a permanent order because of the petitioner's failure to appear. Judges
may wish to inquire as to whether the petitioner has been intimidated or
has failed to understand the necessity of appearing at the hearing for the
permanent order. 

Education about domestic abuse. Judges need to:

o Be aware of the cyclical nature of domestic violence, whereby incidents
of abuse are followed by periods of affectionate behavior and promises to
reform. Judges may find this knowledge useful when faced with repeat
petitioners. Even several temporary emergency petitions followed by
failure to pursue petitions for permanent orders do not necessarily imply
bad faith on the part of the petitioner nor suggest that successive
emergency orders are not warranted. 

o Understand and not underestimate the power of judicial admonitions in
promoting abusers' adherence to the requirements of protective orders.

Training on civil protection orders. Judicial training in this area should
include: 

o A thorough analysis of the State statute.

o An explanation of how civil protection orders can contribute to
maintaining law and order. 

o An explanation of the dynamics of battering and the psychosocial and
institutional factors that sustain it.

o A discussion of how judges can best use their authority in the courtroom
to intervene effectively in domestic violence situations.

Implications for Law Enforcement

Training on civil protection orders would help police officers:

o Provide victims with information about the protection order process,
which they are often required to do by statute or by police department
general orders.

o Become aware that quick service of protection orders is important to
prevent renewed violence.

o Learn of the statutory requirements regarding enforcement of protective
orders, police liability for failure to enforce, and the advantages of strict
enforcement for police officers.

Implications for Prosecutors

Whether or not the State statute mandates assistance to victims seeking
protection orders, prosecutors may provide that assistance as part of a
larger mandate to control crime. Because protection orders offer an
opportunity to prevent future crime and enhance law enforcement, regular
involvement by prosecutors, while creating an immediate time demand,
may be viewed as a desirable investment in reducing future caseloads.

Implications for Victim Advocates

Victim advocates can assist petitioners in various ways, including:

o Determining their eligibility under the statute to petition for an order.

o Explaining the protection order process and assisting in filling out forms. 

o Explaining the legal help available, relief that can be requested, and the
limitations of an order. 

o Accompanying petitioners to the initial hearing for a temporary order. 

o Helping prepare petitioners for the hearing for the full order.

o Accompanying petitioners to the hearing for a permanent order.

Victim advocates can also expedite court proceedings by performing the
following functions:

o Prescreening petitioners for eligibility criteria under the statute and
making sure that petition forms are properly completed before the hearing.

o Accompanying victims in the courtroom, resulting in more orderly
proceedings.

o Arranging for witnesses to appear with the victim, facilitating complete
presentation of evidence.

o Addressing petitioners' fears about appearing for the hearing for the
permanent order.

o Increasing the court's ability to provide needed protection. 

o Helping to identify cases in which attorney assistance is essential.

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

 The Effectiveness of Civil Protection Orders

by Susan Keilitz, Paula Hannaford, and Hillery S. Efkeman[9]

Purpose of Research

To measure how various factors affect the effectiveness of civil protection
orders in terms of improving the quality of women's lives and of deterring
abusive behavior. These factors include the court intake process, the level
of assistance available to petitioners, the level of abuse the victim suffered,
and the criminal history of the respondent.

Methods

The study examined civil protection orders in the Family Court in
Wilmington, Delaware; the County Court in Denver, Colorado; and the
District of Columbia Superior Court. Data were compiled from initial
telephone interviews with 285 women petitioners approximately a month
after they received a protection order; followup interviews with 177 of
these women about 6 months later; civil case records of petitioners
participating in the study; and criminal history records of men named in
the protection orders the study participants obtained.

Findings

Data from interviews and criminal and court records disclosed:

o Most of the petitioners had suffered physical abuse, and for more than
half the physical abuse was severe. Few victims sought protection orders
immediately; a quarter had endured the abuse for more than 5 years.

o The longer the women experienced abuse, the more intense the abusive
behavior became.

o The majority of abusers had criminal records, and most had been
arrested for violent crimes other than domestic violence.

o Temporary protection orders can be useful even if the victim does not
follow through to obtain a permanent order. Victims' most common stated
reason for not returning for a permanent protection order was that their
abusers had stopped bothering them.

o While respondents usually violate protective orders in some way, the
orders generally deter repeated incidents of physical and psychological
abuse.

o While victims whose partners have a history of violent crime are more
likely than other victims to be revictimized after receiving protection
orders, they are also more likely than other victims with protection
ordersto believe that the orders have improved their well-being in terms of
self-esteem and feelings of security.

o Victims do not use the contempt process to enforce orders.

o The potential for linking victims to services through the court process
has not been achieved.

Implications for all Criminal Justice Practitioners

To improve the level of assistance, practitioners, including victim
advocates, need to:

o Provide counseling to domestic violence victims as soon as possible
about the low likelihood of abatement of the abuse without a specific
intervention. In cases where the abuser has a criminal history/record of
violence, the dual interventions of criminal prosecution and civil
protection orders may best meet the victim's objective need for increased
protection and subjective need for self-esteem and greater feelings of
security.

o Stress the importance of safety planning to victims seeking protection
orders, particularly those whose abusers have a history of violent crime.

Implications for Prosecutors 

Since protection orders are less likely to deter abusers with a history of
violent crime than other abusers, criminal prosecution may be required to
curb their abusive behavior.

Implications for Judges and Court Employees

Issuing protection orders can provide the necessary intervention to abate
the increasing intensity of domestic violence. Protection orders should
take into account:

o The particular needs of the petitioner. Among the potential orders issued
shouldbe exclusive use of the family residence by the victim and substance
abuse treatment and batterer treatment for the abuser.

o The criminal history of alleged abusers. This is critical because abusers
with a history of violent and drug- and alcohol-related crimes engage in
particularly intense abuse of their partners. Special conditions such as
batterer treatment and substance abuse treatment may be warranted in such
cases. In addition, judges should stress to these victims the need for safety
precautions and inform them about using law enforcement and the court to
enforce the protection orders.

To increase the victims' use of the legal system in deterring further
violence in their lives, judges can help ensure the provision of the
following:

o Education for petitioners about temporary protection orders and about
safety planning. This information is critical because significant numbers of
victims who have obtained temporary protection orders do not follow
through with a request for permanent protection orders.

o User-friendly information to victims who have obtained protection
orders about using law enforcement and the contempt process to enforce
the orders locally, throughout the State, and in other States. 

o User-friendly information for petitioners of protection orders about the
full range of special conditions in protection orders and about available
services, such as police and prosecutor victim assistance units, victim
counseling, shelters for battered women and their children, pro bono legal
services, and employment and education counseling.

o A more centralized court process and direct assistance to petitioners for
protective orders.

Implications for Law Enforcement

Law enforcement agencies can do more to assist prosecutors in developing
cases for prosecution, to arrest perpetrators, and to help victims access the
civil protection order process, for instance:

o Police can mandate, as an integral component of officer preparation
police training in domestic violence, arrest policies with respect to
domestic violence, and enforcement procedures. 

o Police can provide victims with user-friendly information about the civil
protection order process.

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From 

Effects of Restraining Orders on Domestic Violence Victims

by Adele Harrell and Barbara Smith[10]

Purpose of Research

To assess the impact of restraining orders in domestic violence cases by
focusing on the extent to which such orders reduce further abuse of
women.

Methods

Data were obtained from a sample of 355 temporary restraining orders
issued in two jurisdictions in Colorado during the first 9 months of 1991.
The cases involved abuse of a female by a male with whom she lived or
had lived or with whom she was involved or had been involved in an
intimate relationship. Interviews were conducted 3 months after the order
with the women and the men named in the complaints. The women were
again interviewed a year following the initial order. Additional
information was obtained from court and police records.

Findings

Analysis of the data revealed:

o More than half the women had been physically injured during the
incident that led them to seek temporary restraining orders.

o Many women thought the temporary restraining order was helpful in
documenting that the abuse had occurred, but fewer than half thought the
man believed he had to obey the order.

o Of the women who obtained temporary restraining orders, three-fifths
returned to request that the order be made permanent.

o Women gave several reasons for not returning to request permanent
orders, among these: 

--Their abusers had stopped bothering them.

--Their abusers exerted pressure on them to drop their complaints.

--They feared retaliation if they persisted in their complaints.

--Problems had been encountered in getting the temporary orders served
on the abusers--a prerequisite to the hearing for the permanent order.

o Other significant factors related to whether the women returned to court
for a permanent order were age (older women were more likely to return);
race/ethnicity (white and Hispanic women were slightly more likely than
black women to return); and whether the women gave the police copies of
the restraining orders (those who did were more likely than those who did
not to return).

o Factors not significantly related to the decision to return for a permanent
order included education, employment status, children in the home,
whether or not the woman lived with the man at the time of the incident,
length of the relationship, duration of abuse in the relationship, and
severity of the incident described in the complaint.

o The majority (60 percent) of women with temporary restraining orders
reported that the orders were violated in the year after they were issued.
Nearly a third (29 percent) reported that the violations involved severe
violence.

o Severe violence, other forms of physical violence, and threats or
property damage occurred as often for women with permanent orders as
they did for women without permanent orders. Permanent orders did
significantly reduce psychological abuse.

o The severity of the incident described in the complaint did not predict
abusive incidents or specific types of abuse during the year following the
initial order. However, severity of prior abuse and persistence in prior
abuse were significantly related to the severity of abuse in the year after
the restraining order.

o The probability of continued abuse increased when the male strongly
resisted the orders at the time of the hearing; when the woman seeking the
order was living apart from the abuser at the time the order was sought;
and when the woman had children.

o The woman's age, employment status, or financial support from the man
after the order were not significantly related to postorder abuse.

o When police arrested the abuser during the incident that led to the
protection order, the likelihood of severe violence during the following
year diminished but the likelihood of other abusive acts was not reduced.

o Men who voiced strong objections to restraining orders were three to
four times as likely to violate the orders.

The researchers concluded:

o The majority of women seeking restraining orders had serious
complaints of abuse. Protection orders were generally not sought as a form
of early intervention but rather as a signal of desperation following
extensive problems.

o Information about the persistence and severity of prior abuse (rather than
merely about the abuse that precipitated the request for a protection order
or the duration of prior abuse) was useful in assessing for potential
lethality and in developing safety plans for the abused.

o Although men named in restraining orders continued their abuse, they
were less likely to commit acts of serious violence if arrested.

Implications for Law Enforcement

Law enforcement can take several steps to reduce further violence against
women:

o Police can reduce the likelihood of severe violence after the order by
being helpful at the time of the initial incident. 

o Police can reduce the likelihood of severe violence in the year after the
incident by making an arrest at the time of the incident.

o Sheriffs can be more resourceful in helping to serve abusers with
temporary protection orders.

o Law enforcement should reexamine the appropriateness of police
response to violations and institute training and monitoring of enforcement
of orders.

Implications for Judges

Judges can increase the impact of restraining orders and make better
informed decisions about granting an order and the conditions of an order,
specifically, judges need to:

o Be aware of the history of violence between the parties, the presence of
children during the violence, and the full extent of the injuries sustained
during the incident that led the woman to seek an order of protection.

o Take a leadership role in working with other agencies to help women get
their temporary orders served, including educating sheriffs and having
probation departments help locate subjects of the orders who might be on
probation.

o Include firm and specific statements about the behavioral requirements
of the order and the consequences of noncompliance when the abuser
voices strenuous objections to the order.

o Include in the temporary order specific prohibitions against the abuser's
pressuring the woman to drop the petition.

o "Customize" standardized forms where warranted to include additional
orders and make sure that both the abuser and the abused understand the
meaning of the various provisions.

o Treat seriously strenuous objections to the orders by the men against
whom they are issued.

o Emphasize during the temporary and permanent hearings that women
can, and should, return to court to report violations.

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

Re-abuse in a Population of Court-Restrained Male Batterers: Why
Restraining Orders Don't Work

by Andrew R. Klein[11]

Purpose of Research

To provide insight into the abusers against whom restraining orders are
issued and the effect of the orders in terms of new abuse, and to predict
future risk of abuse based on the characteristics of the abuse, the victim,
the defendant, or the criminal justice system intervention.

Methods

Data were drawn from 663 restraining order cases--every such case in the
Quincy (Massachusetts) District Court in 1990 in which the defendant was
a male and the victim a current or former spouse or current or former
girlfriend, who either cohabited with the abuser or had a child by him.
Each abuser was tracked for 2 years to determine further abuse, that is, an
arrest for a criminal violation of the order or for a new assault and/or
threat, and/or a new restraining order based on a new incident of abuse
filed in the Quincy District Court.

Findings

An examination of the restraining order cases showed that:

o Most abusers brought to civil court by their victims had physically
assaulted their victims.

o Most abusers had prior criminal histories; the average record length was
13 complaints. More than half had at least one prior record for an alcohol
or drug crime (usually drunk driving), and two-fifths had at least one prior
complaint for a crime against the person. Most abusers with histories of
crimes against the person had been violent with men as well as women.

o Nearly two-fifths of the incidents resulting in restraining orders involved
alcohol or drug use by the abuser.

o A significant number of women requesting restraining orders had taken
significant steps to protect themselves prior to coming to court, either by
divorcing or by physically separating from their abusers.

o While three-quarters of the women who had received temporary
restraining orders returned to court for the contested hearing (for the
permanent order), nearly half asked the court to drop the order prior to the
1-year termination date.

o Almost half of the abusers reabused their victims within 2 years of the
restraining order. The reabuse rate did not differ for those who maintained
the orders and those who dropped them.

o Statistically significant predictors for new abuse as measured by a new
arrest were age, prior criminal history, and court-ordered "no contact"
provisions:

--Younger abusers reabuse more than older abusers.

--Abusers with criminal histories reabuse more than abusers without
criminal histories.

--Abusers with longer prior criminal records reabuse regardless of whether
or not the orders specify "no contact" with the victims.

o Variables that do not predict new abuse include an arrest at the time of
the order, the violent or nonviolent nature of the precipitating incident, and
the existence of a prior restraining order.

Conclusion

Civil restraining orders do not adequately protect women from further
abuse and a primary reliance on such orders must be seriously questioned.
Any effectiveness that they have in preventing reabuse comes from their
issuance, rather than their maintenance. Accordingly, their optimal use
may be in conjunction with vigorous prosecution and significant
sanctioning of abusers. 

Implications for Law Enforcement

Arrest for domestic violence should be mandatory whether a restraining
order is in effect or not.

Implications for Prosecutors

Given the limitations of civil restraining orders and the risk presented by
abusers, prosecutors should consider these cases for criminal prosecution.
Prosecutors also need to institute a "no-drop" policy.

Implications for Judges

If abusers are allowed to remain in the community, victim safety requires
that they receive the same intensity of supervision and scrutiny as the
other more serious offenders currently under community-based
supervision.

-------------------------------

ARREST

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From 

Does Arrest Deter Domestic Violence?

by Janell D. Schmidt and Lawrence W. Sherman[12]

Purpose of Research

To test the deterrent effects of various police responses to domestic
violence.

Methods 

The original Minneapolis study and replication studies were controlled
experiments in which domestic violence misdemeanor cases were assigned
one of several possible responses. In Minneapolis and most of the
replication studies, the assignment was random (an exception was
Metro-Dade where the police had discretion whether to arrest or not); the
efficacy of each treatment was measured by interviews with victims and
official records. 

The six cities selected for the study and the random assignments to
possible treatments were as follows:

o Minneapolis (sample size: 314)

(1) Arrest.

(2) Sending the suspect away for 8 hours.

(3)Advising the couple to get help.

o Metro-Dade (sample size: 907)

(1) Arrest with followup counseling.

(2) Arrest without followup counseling.

(3) No arrest with followup counseling.

(4) No arrest without followup counseling.

o Colorado Springs (sample size: 1,600)

(1) Arrest with professional counseling.

(2) Arrest without professional counseling.

(3) Issuance of an emergency protection order.

o Milwaukee (sample size: 1,200) 

(1) No arrest.

(2) A 2-hour arrest.

(3) Arrest with an overnight stay in jail.

o Charlotte (NC) (sample size: 686)

(1) Arrest.

(2) Mediation.

(3) Separation.

(4) Citation.

o Omaha (sample size: 330)

(1) Arrest.

(2) Sending the suspect away for 8 hours.

(3) Advising the couple to get help.

(4) Arrest warrants for absent offenders.

(5) No followup for absent offenders.

Findings

The research undertaken in the six cities revealed:

o Arrests reduced violence by some abusers (e.g., employed abusers; those
whose victims were white and Hispanic) and increased it for others (e.g.,
unemployed abusers, those whose victims were black).

o Arrests may reduce domestic violence in the short run, but may increase
it in the long run.

o None of the innovative treatments--namely, counseling or protective
orders--produced any improvement over arrest versus no arrest.

o Citations to appear in court caused more violence than arrests.
(Charlotte)

o Offenders who had left the scene before the police arrived and against
whom warrants were issued were responsible for less repeat violence than
absent offenders against whom warrants were not issued. (Omaha)

Implications for Legislators and Law Enforcement

The following recommendations were drawn:

o Legislators should repeal mandatory arrest laws and authorize structured
police discretion.

o Legislators should allow police to make warrantless arrests.

o Police should serve warrants on absent offenders.

o Special units and policies should focus on chronically violent
individuals.

Implications for Prosecutors

Prosecutors should issue warrants for absent offenders.

-------------------------------

Conclusions and Implications Drawn From

Must We Stop Arresting Batterers?: Analysis and Policy Implications of
New Police Domestic Violence Studies

by Joan Zorza[13]

Purpose of Research

To review and critique the methods and findings of the Minneapolis
Domestic Violence Police Experiment and five replication studies that
attempted to test the deterrent effect on domestic violence of arrests and
other police responses. 

Methods

The methods of these studies are described in the summary of "Does
Arrest Deter Domestic Violence?" by Janell D. Schmidt and Lawrence W.
Sherman, which appears elsewhere in this publication.


Findings

The major research findings of the Minneapolis Domestic Violence Police
Experiment and the replication studies are included in the
above-referenced summary of "Does Arrest Deter Domestic Violence?"

Conclusions

There were fundamental design flaws in the studies, which included:

o Ignoring the fact that domestic violence, unchecked, usually escalates in
frequency and severity.

o Failing to take into account the impact of postarrest decisions by
prosecutors and courts.

Other design flaws included (in one or more studies):

o Instructing the police to discourage future police contacts by the victim.

o Including self-defense cases that have lesser deterrent possibilities.

o Assigning bad risks to the arrest category.

o Providing advance notice to responding officers about the response to be
made.

o Failing to screen offenders for prior police contact.

o Failing to take into account victims' responses to offender arrests or the
effect of the violence on others (e.g., children).

o Failing to randomly assign separated parties.

The policy value of the studies is limited since they:

o Were limited to misdemeanors.

o Did not address the effect of nonarrest.

o Isolated the initial police response from other possible responses to
domestic abuse and studied only one of potentially dozens of issues that
could have been studied.

o Ignored nondeterrence benefits of arrest, including immediate safety for
the victim, access to services, and conveying a message that domestic
violence is a crime.

Other conclusions include:

o While mandatory arrest may have no greater deterrent effect than other
police responses, it is unclear as to whether or not it has a lesser deterrent
effect.

o In the short term, mandatory arrest results in lower rates of recidivism
than nonarrest police responses. It is likely, therefore, that later escalation
is motivated by something other than anger or retaliation for arrest.

o Mandatory arrests are followed by a reduction of subsequent violence
against victims of employed abusers and against white victims and
Hispanic victims, and a slight increase in subsequent violence against
black victims.

o Arrest without more follow-through by the criminal justice system may
be too weak a sanction to deter many batterers.

o In addition to considering the deterrent effects of arrest, it is important to
consider its effects on victims, children, and society.

Implications for Law Enforcement

With probable cause, police should:

o Arrest all abusers not acting in self-defense.

o Issue an arrest warrant even if the offender is absent.

A final implication: The length of time an arrested abuser is held should be
no shorter than that of other offenders.

-------------------------------

Selected Conclusions Drawn From

 Mandatory Arrest of Batterers: A Reply to Its Critics

by Evan Stark[14]

Purpose of Research

To review and critique the assumptions, methods, and findings of the
literature concluding that mandatory arrest policies are ineffective,
including the Minneapolis police experiment and the five studies designed
to replicate it, which attempted to test the deterrent effect on domestic
violence of arrests and other police responses.

Methods

The methods of these studies are described in the summary of "Does
Arrest Deter Domestic Violence?" by Janell D. Schmidt and Lawrence W.
Sherman, elsewhere in this publication.

Findings

The major research findings of the Minneapolis Domestic Violence Police
Experiment and the replication studies are described in the
above-referenced summary of "Does Arrest Deter Domestic Violence?"

Conclusions

The author offers several conclusions regarding "proarrest" or mandatory
arrest strategies:

o Proarrest strategy should be thought of as a "package of goods" that may
include everything from a mere warning, handcuffing, or an arrest warrant
through a weekend in jail, mandated treatment, a stalker's law, community
intervention programs, the provision of court-based advocates, and real
prison time.

o In addition to repeated physical abuse, woman battering typically
includes a range of coercive strategies designed to dominate a partner.
Many offenders respond to sanctions against physical abuse by isolating,
intimidating, and controlling their partners. Therefore, mandatory arrest
policies are best assessed by their overall effect on the victim's
subordination rather than by the incidence of violence alone.

o There are reasons beyond deterrence for mandatory arrest policy. These
include:

--Providing a standard against which to judge variation in police response.

--Providing immediate protection from current violence and giving victims
time to consider their options.

--Reducing the overall incidence of domestic violence both directly
(because arrest might deter recidivism), and by sending a clear message
that battering is unacceptable.

--Acknowledging a special social interest in redressing the legacy of
discriminatory treatment of women by law enforcement.

--Serving a "redistributive" function by acknowledging that police service
is a resource previously not available to women on an egalitarian basis. 

--Providing victims access to services and protection that would not be
available outside the criminal justice system.

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From 

Determining Police Response to Domestic Violence Victims

by Eve S. Buzawa and Thomas Austin[15]

Purpose of Research

To determine when and if victim preferences affect the decision to arrest
domestic violence offenders and to determine victim satisfaction with
police response.

Methods

The research was conducted in four precincts within the Detroit Police
Department. Officers were instructed to complete Supplemental Arrest
Reports in domestic assault cases to provide background information on
the victim and offender, characteristics of the incident, seriousness of
injury to the victim, the victim's preferred response, and the actual police
response. The researchers analyzed 165 reports. In addition, 110 victims
were randomly selected for in-person interviews. 

Findings

An analysis of the Supplemental Arrest Reports found:

o The presence of bystanders or children during the abuse dramatically
increased the chances that an arrest would be made.

o The presence of weapons affected how the officer handled the incident.
The use of guns and sharp objects more often resulted in an arrest than the
use of blunt objects or bodily weapons.

o When an injury resulted, officers were more likely to make an arrest.

o Arrests were more than twice as likely when the offender and victim
shared the same residence. There was not, however, a statistically
significant difference in arrest rates for married versus unmarried couples.

o About one-third of the victims told the officer they wanted prosecution;
among those who expressed such a desire, arrests were made in 44 percent
of the cases. When the victim did not want an arrest, an arrest was made in
only 21 percent of the cases.

Interviews with the victims found:

o The large majority of victims (85 percent) were satisfied with the police
response. They were especially satisfied when the police complied with
their preferences regarding arresting (or not arresting) the offender.

o Most women victims were satisfied with the police response but not one
male victim was.

Implications for Law Enforcement

With regard to victim preferences, it is recommended that police officers:

o Weigh more heavily the desires of victims about arresting (or not
arresting) the offender. As a way to accomplish this, police reports could
include victim preferences and if the officer disagreed with the victim
preferences, he or she should state why.

o Increase their understanding of the dynamics of domestic violence cases
through training; this is critical as this is correlated with officers taking
victims' preferences seriously.

-------------------------------

PROSECUTION AND DEFENSE 

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

Prosecution Response to Domestic Violence: Results of a Survey of Large
Jurisdictions

by Donald J. Rebovich[16]

Purpose of Research

To assess the state of formal and informal domestic violence programs
within local prosecutors' offices, identify needs of local prosecutors,
explain common obstacles to successful prosecution of domestic violence,
and recommend ways to improve the effectiveness of domestic violence
prosecution.

Methods

Data were gathered from a national mail survey of 200 local prosecutors'
offices, comprising all prosecutors' offices in jurisdictions with
populations of more than 250,000. The response rate was 68 percent.

Findings

Data from the survey were grouped according to the following categories:

Case Management: 

o Most prosecutors' offices handled both felony and misdemeanor
domestic violence cases. 

o The level of available resources affected the manner in which domestic
violence cases were handled in most prosecutors' offices. 

Case screening and charging: 

o In more than three-quarters of the jurisdictions, domestic violence cases
typically came into the prosecutor's office through the police rather than
the victim. 

o Most prosecutors' offices experienced screening and charging
decisionmaking problems unique to domestic violence cases. Slightly
more than half also used criteria unique to domestic violence cases in
screening and charging these cases. Most proceeded with prosecution
despite the noncooperation of the victim. 

o Approximately two-thirds had formal office protocols for processing
domestic violence cases, but fewer than a third had separate protocols for
misdemeanors and felonies. 

o Most large prosecutors' offices were in jurisdictions where proarrest
policies have been adopted by local police departments. While proarrest
policies affected the volume of domestic violence cases in these offices,
they resulted in modified decisionmaking in fewer than a fifth of the
offices and affected the plea negotiation process in even fewer.

o Two-thirds of the prosecutors' offices had no-drop policies, although
there was usually some flexibility in these policies.

o The degree to which victim willingness to cooperate affected
prosecutorial decisions varied according to size of the jurisdiction. In
jurisdictions with populations of more than 500,000, only 8 percent of the
respondents felt that victim cooperation affected their decision to
prosecute to a high degree, whereas a third of those in jurisdictions
between 250,000 and 500,000 felt that it affected the decision to a
significant degree.

Pretrial release policies: 

o Three-quarters of prosecutors recommended bail amounts comparable to
those for other offenses. Almost all requested that certain conditions be set
on the abuser's release.

o Slightly more than two-thirds of prosecutors in jurisdictions between
250,000 and 500,000 notified the victim of the defendant's release, while
only half in jurisdictions with more than 500,000 did so.

o While most prosecutors relied on protective orders at least to a medium
degree, only three-quarters found them effective, and two-thirds rated their
effectiveness as only average.

o The presence of a child had a medium or high impact on how the
prosecutor proceeded in nearly three-quarters of the jurisdictions.

Postcharge diversion: 

o Half the prosecutors' offices used post-charge diversion and half did not.
Where such programs existed, nearly two-thirds were pretrial and the rest
were postplea. Generally, offenders who successfully completed the
program were not prosecuted.

Trials:

o All jurisdictions in the study encountered victims who preferred not to
be involved or come to court. Most also experienced victims who testified
only upon subpoena, victim nonappearance upon subpoena, and active
undermining of the prosecution by victims. A third of jurisdictions had
uncooperative victims in slightly more than half of their cases.

o The most common method used to overcome problems connected with
uncooperative domestic violence victims was the subpoena, used by most
of the jurisdictions. A close second was the use of photographs of injuries
to the victim. Other much less frequently used methods included evidence
of "excited utterances" at the crime scene, family/neighbor testimony, 911
audiotapes, sworn statements, victim advocate testimony, and videotapes
of initial victim interviews.

Sentencing options:

o About two-thirds of prosecutors believed sentences for domestic
violence offenders in their jurisdictions were moderate and most of the rest
believed they were lenient.

Victim support programs: 

o Most prosecutors' offices employed some formal procedures to
encourage victim participation in the prosecution process. 

o The most common services were referral to social service agencies and
court accompaniment of the victim. Others included court preparation,
victim education about criminal/civil remedies, and supportive counseling.

Implications for Prosecutors

As growing numbers of police departments adopt proarrest policies for
domestic violence offenses, prosecutors' offices are being faced with
increasing numbers of domestic violence cases. 

The study provides benchmarks against which prosecutors may compare
their domestic violence policies and practices with those of their
colleagues in other jurisdictions and learn of their colleagues' views on a
number of issues. 

It also raises--but does not generally provide definitive answers to--a
number of important questions for prosecutors' offices. Among them:

o What, if any, aspects of domestic violence cases warrant unique
screening criteria?

o What alternatives might be pursued when victims are noncooperative?

--Subpoenas.

--Photographs of injuries to the victim.

--Evidence of "excited utterances" at the crime scene.

--Family or neighbor testimony.

--Use of 911 audiotapes.

--Sworn statements.

--Victim advocate testimony.

--Videotapes of initial victim interviews.

o Is a "no drop" policy appropriate? If so, are there any exceptions?

o Should bail amounts be different for domestic violence cases than for
other cases? What about other conditions of pretrial release?

o Should victims be notified of defendants' pretrial release?

o When should protective orders be recommended? What is the
appropriate extent of followup to ensure enforcement of protective orders?

o How should the presence of a child affect the decision whether or not to
prosecute?

o Should postcharge diversion be an option? If so, should it be used
pretrial or postplea? If a defendant successfully completes the diversion
program, should the charges be dropped? Should lesser charges be
pursued?

o What formal procedures should be employed to encourage victim
participation in the prosecution process?

--Referral to social service agencies.

--Court accompaniment of the victim.

--Court preparation of the victim.

--Victim education about criminal/civil remedies.

--Supportive counseling.

o What, if any, protocols should differ for misdemeanor domestic violence
offenses and felony domestic violence offenses?

o What (additional) resources are needed to implement desirable domestic
violence policies? What are the priorities?

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

The Indianapolis Domestic Violence Prosecution Experiment

by David A. Ford and Mary Jean Regoli[17]

Purpose of Research

To examine the effectiveness of alternative prosecutorial policies in
reducing renewed violence by misdemeanor battery defendants against
their partners.

Methods

The research consisted of two randomized experiments. One involved
on-scene arrests (OSAs) of 198 suspects by police responding to violent
domestic disturbances, and the other involved 480 suspects who were the
subject of victim complaints (VCs) filed in person with the prosecutor's
office. OSA cases could not be dropped by the victims, and were randomly
assigned to one of three prosecutorial policy tracks: (1) pretrial diversion
involving rehabilitative counseling; (2) adjudicated guilt with counseling
as a condition of probation; and (3) other sentencing such as fines,
probation, and jail time. VC cases had a fourth randomized policy track
whereby victims were allowed to drop charges; in addition, the defendants
in VC cases were randomly assigned to be brought to court through either
a warrant or a summons. Accordingly, there were eight combinations for
VC cases compared to three for OSA cases. 

Six months after court settlement, victims and accused offenders were
interviewed and official records examined to determine whether any of the
alternative criminal justice policies had influenced the prevalence,
severity, and frequency of subsequent violence.

Findings

The study revealed:

o Domestic violence victims were considerably more likely to have been
battered in the 6 months before their cases were brought to the prosecutor
than in the 6 months following settlement (more than 70 percent before vs.
fewer than 40 percent after).

o Battering did not necessarily stop between the time accused batterers
were arrested or summoned to court and the time their cases were settled.
Approximately 20 percent of defendants arrested on the scene or as a
result of warrants issued in response to formal victim complaints
rebattered their victims before case settlement, as did 27 percent of
defendants summoned to court following formal victim complaints. 

o Regardless of particular prosecutorial policies pursued and methods of
bringing defendants to court, there was considerable rebattering in the 6
months following case settlement. However, in victim-initiated cases, the
manner whereby defendants were brought to court and the specific
prosecutorial policies followed significantly affected the extent of
rebattering:

--In cases initiated by warrantless on-scene arrests, nearly 40 percent of
defendants rebattered their partners within 6 months of settlement. None
of the three prosecutorial policies (pretrial diversion to rehabilitative
counseling, adjudicated guilt with counseling as a condition of probation,
or traditional sentencing) had a unique preventative impact on the
prevalence, severity, or frequency of rebattering.

--In cases initiated by formal victim complaints, 29 percent of defendants
battered their partners again within 6 months of settlement. However,
arresting defendants by warrant and allowing victims to drop charges
resulted in a rebattering rate (13 percent) less than half that of each of the
other seven prosecution possibilities. Summoning defendants to court and
pursuing noncounseling sentencing alternatives resulted in the highest
rebattering rate (44 percent). 

--Moreover, while fewer than 20 percent of all subjects of victim
complaints engaged in severe followup violence within 6 months of
settlement, 36 percent of those summoned to court and prosecuted on
noncounseling sentencing tracks did so. 

o When victims were allowed to drop complaints they had filed (whether
resulting in warrant or summons), those who elected to go forth with the
prosecution were significantly less likely to be rebattered than those who
did not. Those who dropped charges after the batterer was summoned to
court were in greatest jeopardy of renewed violence.

o Regardless of the prosecutorial track pursued, desired court outcomes
resulted more frequently when cases were initiated by victim complaints
(67 percent of the cases) than when they were initiated by on-scene arrests
(58 percent).

o The lowest rates of followup violence were associated with findings of
"not guilty." Other court outcomes did not significantly affect the
prevalence of followup violence.

o Regardless of whether cases were initiated by on-scene arrests or by
victim complaints and regardless of the prosecutorial track taken, most
victims reported feeling more secure and in control 6 months after their
cases were settled than they did before prosecutorial action was taken.

Implications for Prosecutors

The following practical implications were drawn:

o Prosecutors can help victims minimize the chance of violence by
affirming the legitimacy of their criminal complaints and by respecting
their decisions about what is best under their unique circumstances, even if
contrary to the prosecutor's administrative concerns.

o Since victims are frequently battered between the time a defendant is
arrested or a complaint is filed and the time the case is settled, prosecutors
can support and hopefully protect victims by attending to their interests
throughout the prosecution process, for example, by monitoring warrants
to see they are served in a timely manner; by requesting protection orders
and seeing that they are aggressively enforced; by watching for evidence
of obstruction of justice in defense attorneys' contacts with victims; and by
making every effort to account for a victim's safety.

o Prosecutors should review their own prosecution policies in terms of
their effectiveness in reducing followup violence. [These implications are
not explicit in the report but appear to follow from the findings and
conclusions.]

o Prosecutors who allow victims to drop their complaints should explain
to them that dropping the charges might entail increased risk of
violence.[These implications are not explicit in the report but appear to
follow from the findings and conclusions.]

--Prosecutors who respond to victim complaints by issuing summonses to
alleged batterers should consider whether warrants might result in less
rebattering, especially if victims are allowed to drop charges or cases are
generally put on a traditional sentencing track. [These implications are not
explicit in the report but appear to follow from the findings and
conclusions.]

o Before diverting accused batterers to counseling programs or
recommending probation with counseling, prosecutors should be informed
about the long-range success rates of available counseling programs since,
at least in the short term, counseling alternatives are no more effective
than traditional sentences in reducing followup battering. [These
implications are not explicit in the report but appear to follow from the
findings and conclusions.]

Implications for Judges

In sentencing batterers, judges should take into account that, at least in the
short term, probation with counseling may be no more effective in
reducing followup violence than traditional sentences. Judges should seek
evidence that counseling programs available in their jurisdictions are
effective in preventing violence or, if honoring a victim's request for
mandated counseling, that the counseling will not result in further harm.
[These implications are not explicit in the report but appear to follow from
the findings and conclusions.]

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From 

Validity of "Battered Woman Syndrome" in Criminal Cases Involving
Battered Women

by Malcolm Gordon[18]

Purpose of Research

To compile information about "medical and psychological testimony on
the validity of battered women's syndrome as a condition" (as required in
the 1994 Violence Against Women Act).

Method

The study consisted of a review of literature concerning scientific and
clinical knowledge about battering and its effects, the implications of this
scientific knowledge for criminal cases involving battered women, and the
role of expert testimony in criminal cases involving battered women.

Findings

The term "battered woman syndrome" wrongly implies that all battered
women respond similarly to being battered and that the common response
includes inability to defend themselves, posttraumatic stress distress, and a
pathological or maladjusted mental state.

In fact, battered women may experience a wide range of traumatic
psychological reactions to being battered, which may affect:

o Continued involvement in an abusive relationship.

o Use of physical aggression toward the abuser.

o Future appraisal of the threat of violence.

o Involvement in other criminal activity.

o Refusal or reluctance to cooperate in prosecuting the abuser because of
fear of retaliation.

Battered women also experience negative psychological consequences of
domestic violence, which may include:

o Amnesia.

o Re-experiencing the trauma (e.g., flashbacks).

o Absence of emotional reactions.

o Hostile or angry reactions.

o Depression.

Additional findings included that:

o Battered women may continue their involvement in abusive relationships
because of:

--Economic factors.

--Fear that violence will escalate if there is an attempt to leave.

--Fear that the abuser might retaliate by legally or illegally taking the
children.

--Emotional attachment to the abuser.

o It is a myth that battered women are passive about their victimization;
many do fight back either physically or verbally, or engage in other active
efforts to resist, avoid, escape, and stop the violence against them.

o A battered woman's appraisal of the threat implicit in a batterer's
behavior is based on the pattern of the batterer's prior violence and abuse,
the actual threat, the timing of the threat, and the victim's state of mind at
the time of the threat.

o There is no one pattern that characterizes all batterers' behavior. Several
recognized patterns include:

--A "cycle of violence" with a series of stages with differing levels of
positive and negative emotional engagement, coercion, and physical
aggression. These stages may include tension-building, acute-battering,
and contrite-loving phases.

--A long period of time between acute battering episodes.

--"Separation abuse" where the batterer threatens violence or retaliates
violently if the victim separates from the batterer either physically or by
making herself unavailable (e.g., becoming involved in a new relationship
or beginning divorce proceedings).

o Battered women may fail to cooperate with prosecution as a way to
avoid retaliation by their abusers or as a way of avoiding painful and
distressing emotions that cooperation would entail.

o Because battering and the effects of battering vary from case to case,
there is no "battered woman defense" per se.

o Nevertheless, evidence and expert testimony about battering and its
effects can assist the factfinder in putting battered women's actions in
context in criminal proceedings involving:

--Self-defense or insanity defense of a battered woman who has murdered
or assaulted her batterer.

--Charging or sentencing a battered woman who has murdered or assaulted
her batterer.

--Duress defense of a battered woman who has committed criminal or
illegal conduct through the instigation or coercion of a perpetrator.

--Prosecution of alleged perpetrators of domestic violence. 

Such testimony can also dispel misconceptions about domestic violence
that might be held by a judge or jury.

o Expert testimony about battering may be either general (providing
information about the scientific and clinical knowledge about battering
without relating the information to a specific individual) or specific (based
on an evaluation of a specific individual).

Implications for Defense Attorneys

Expert testimony on domestic violence may be useful in supporting a plea
of self-defense, an insanity defense, or a duress defense. It may also be
used to support mitigating factors in charging and sentencing and to
explain misconceptions about domestic violence to judges and juries.

Implications for Prosecutors

Expert testimony may be useful in supporting the prosecution of
defendants accused of domestic violence by explaining the victim's
recantation of previous statements, refusal or unwillingness to proceed,
and other behavior that might otherwise be detrimental to the prosecution,
and by explaining misconceptions about domestic violence to judges and
juries.

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

Impact of Evidence Concerning Battering and Its Effects in Criminal
Trials Involving Battered Women

by Mary Ann Dutton[19]

Purpose of Research

To assess the effects that evidence of battered woman syndrome may have
in criminal trials. 

Method

The findings were based on a 3-day focus group meeting attended by
Federal, State, and tribal court judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys,
expert witnesses, and advocates.

Findings

Results from the panel discussion included:

o Expert testimony concerning battering and its effects can help factfinders
more effectively assess evidence in criminal cases involving battered
women.

o Expert testimony concerning battering and its effects can also dispel
common myths and misunderstandings concerning domestic violence,
including stereotypes of both battered women and batterers, that may
interfere with the factfinders' ability to assess the case.

o Despite precedent for referring to expert testimony in cases involving
battered women as "battered woman syndrome" testimony, the term is
both too ambiguous and too narrow to help factfinders understand the
evidence or determine facts in issue. As with other victims of violence,
there is no single set of effects that characterize all battered women, but
rather a range of effects. References to "battered woman syndrome" should
be replaced by references to "battering and its effects."

o There is a continuing need to educate judges, prosecutors, and defense
attorneys about effectively incorporating into criminal trials available
expertise concerning battering and its effects.

o There is an increased need for resources for expert witnesses to consult
with attorneys and testify in criminal cases. 

o Testimony from "nonprofessionals" experienced in working with
battered women (e.g., shelter workers, police officers, trauma technicians,
hotline workers) should be considered admissible. While such individuals
are not qualified to conduct psychological testing, they should be allowed
to testify about their observations and knowledge of battered women's
experiences generally and their observations of particular battered women
based on their expertise.

o The development of domestic violence coordinating councils has been
associated with the introduction of evidence concerning battering and its
effects into the courtroom. Often headed by the court, these councils
typically include representatives from the prosecutor's office, law
enforcement, batterer treatment programs, battered women's shelters,
schools, hospitals, law clinics, child welfare agencies, and other
government agencies and organizations.

Implications for Judges

Judges who handle cases involving domestic violence would benefit from
the following:

o A basic understanding of battering and its effects to determine the
relevancy of expert witness testimony to the issues at hand and to rule on
issues such as jury instructions and the scope of expert testimony to be
allowed before the triers of fact.

o A general understanding of various scientific methods used in domestic
violence research (e.g., experimental design, correlational, factor analysis,
descriptive, or qualitative) to determine the validity of scientific evidence
about battering and its effects.

o Judicial education programs to increase their substantive knowledge
about domestic violence and the methods of scientific inquiry related to it.
The State Justice Institute, the National Judicial College, the National
Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges, and the American Bar
Association Judicial Administration Division are among groups active in
promoting and sponsoring judicial education about domestic violence.

Implications for Defense Attorneys

Defense attorneys can learn more about battering by attending continuing
legal education programs on the topic and by consulting with expert
witnesses. Consultants may be shelter workers, battered woman advocates,
counselors, psychologists, psychiatrists, or social workers. Defense
attorneys with knowledge about battering and the effects it has on victims
would be able to recognize the following:

o Relevant evidence on the subject when defending battered women
charged with crimes.

o Relevant expert testimony about battering not only in cases where
self-defense can be asserted but also in other cases (e.g., where the woman
commits a crime under the coercion of her batterer).

o Evidence about battering relevant to evaluation of clemency petitions. 

o Potential ramifications of prosecutorial use of expert testimony
regarding battering and its effects when defending alleged batterers.

Implications for Prosecutors

Prosecutors also can learn more about battering by attending continuing
legal education programs on the topic and by consultation with expert
witnesses. Consultants may be shelter workers, battered woman advocates,
counselors, psychologists, psychiatrists, or social workers. Education on
battering and its effects is critical for prosecutors to help them:

o Recognize and introduce relevant evidence on the subject when
prosecuting alleged batterers.

o Use expert testimony in cases against the batterer to explain why the
battered woman has previously recanted testimony, is unwilling to
cooperate with the prosecution, or has engaged in behavior that the
factfinder may find puzzling.

o Recognize the importance of paying considerable attention to battering
issues at the charging stage, whether or not a grand jury is involved.

o Be aware of the potential ramifications of the defense use of expert
testimony regarding battering and its effects.

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From 

Trend Analysis: Expert Testimony on Battering and its Effects in Criminal
Cases

by Janet Parrish[20]

Purpose of Research

To capture current trends in court decisions and statutes regarding the use
of expert testimony on battering and its effects and to highlight various
ways expert testimony can ensure that relevant evidence about battering is
introduced at the trials of battered women or their alleged batterers.

Research Methods

The study analyzed 238 State and 31 Federal court decisions (mostly
appellate) in cases where women defendants introduced--or tried to
introduce--expert witnesses at their trials, and 12 State statutes relating to
the use of expert testimony on battering and its effects in criminal cases.

Research Findings

An analysis of the court decisions revealed:

o There is no "battered woman's defense" per se; expert testimony on
battering and its effects can only be used to support--not to supplant--a
battered woman's use of traditional self-defense or duress claims.

o Since the mid-1980s, courts have increasingly recognized the relevance
of expert testimony about battering and its effects. Such testimony has
been admitted to at least some degree in the District of Columbia and each
of the 50 States. Of the 19 Federal courts that have considered the issue,
all but 3 have admitted the testimony in at least some cases.

o Expert testimony on battering and its effects has been most readily
accepted by State courts in cases involving traditional self-defense
situations.

o A substantial number of States have also admitted expert testimony on
battering and its effects in nontraditional self-defense situations (e.g.,
when a battered woman kills her batterer while he is sleeping or hires a
third party to kill him).

o Some State and Federal courts have admitted expert testimony on
battering and its effects in non-self-defense cases (e.g., where duress is
asserted as a defense or where a battered woman has been charged with a
crime against a third party).

o Most States have admitted expert testimony on battering and its effects
to prove the defendant is a battered woman. However, in many of these
States, the testimony must be "generic," that is, used to explain battering
and its effects generally without reference to the specific defendant. 

o Most States have found expert testimony relevant to supporting a
self-defense claim (assessing the reasonableness of the defendant's belief
she was in danger of imminent harm and/or of her actions in defense of
herself or others) and to assessing the woman's state of mind at the time of
the charged crime.

o More States have precluded expert opinions on whether the defendant
acted reasonably or in self-defense than have allowed such opinions.

o Most States consider expert testimony on battering and its effects
relevant to explaining a battered woman's conduct, including why she did
not leave the battering relationship or committed certain acts.

o Some States have found expert testimony to be admissible to:

--Prove a defendant's diminished capacity, mental defect, or lack of intent.

--Bolster the defendant's credibility.

--Show the existence of mitigating factors at the sentencing phase of the
trial.

o Most States that have considered whether expert testimony on battering
and its effects subjects the defendant to an adverse psychological
examination have concluded that it does. 

o The majority of courts that have considered whether failure to offer
expert testimony on battering and its effects constitutes ineffective
assistance of counsel have found that it does not. Moreover, the few States
that have considered whether indigent battered women must be afforded
State funds to hire expert witnesses have found that the funds can be
denied (although one such decision was reversed in Federal court).

o Appeals courts affirmed nearly two-thirds of the State convictions
appealed by women who had introduced or tried to introduce expert
testimony about battering and its effects at their trials. In nearly
three-quarters of the cases where convictions were affirmed, expert
testimony had been admitted or found admissible. Erroneous exclusion of,
limitation of, or failure of counsel to present expert testimony accounted
for less than half of the convictions that were reversed.

o Expert testimony on battering and its effects has been admitted in some
States when offered by the prosecution (e.g., to explain a battered woman
complainant's prior inconsistent statements).

Implications for Defense Attorneys [These implications are not explicit in
the report but appear to follow the findings.]

Defense attorneys should be aware of the statutes and case law in their
jurisdictions and, if applicable, in the Federal statutes and case law,
regarding:

o General admissibility of expert testimony.

o General exclusion of expert testimony.

o Specific types of cases in which expert testimony is admissible or
excluded, including "traditional" and "nontraditional" self-defense cases
and non-self-defense cases.

o The showing necessary for introduction of expert testimony, including
whether or not there must be a self-defense claim; evidence that battering
(or the "battered woman's syndrome") is accepted in the scientific
community; certain qualifications of the expert; and a showing that the
defendant is, in fact, battered.

o Ineffective counsel issues (outcome of appeals asserting ineffective
counsel on grounds of failure to offer expert testimony on battering and its
effects).

o Issues relating to State funding for expert testimony (decisions relating
to whether States must provide funding for expert testimony).

o The scope and relevance of expert testimony (admissibility of expert
testimony to prove the defendant is a battered woman and/or to explain
battering and its effects generally; admissibility of expert opinion as to
whether the defendant herself is a battered woman). 

Implications for Prosecutors [These implications are not explicit in the
report but appear to follow the findings.]

Prosecutors should be aware of the statutes and case law in their
jurisdictions and, if applicable, Federal statutes and case law, as they relate
to:

o Prosecution of battered women on charges related to the murder or
injury of their batterers or for other crimes where the defense is duress.
(See specifics under "Implications for Defense Attorneys," above.)

o Prosecution of alleged batterers and admissibility of expert testimony on
battering and its effects to explain certain behaviors of battered women,
that is, staying with the batterer, prior inconsistent statements, and
previous failure to pursue charges.

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

Prosecuting Domestic Violence Cases With Reluctant Victims: Assessing
Two Novel Approaches in Milwaukee

by Robert C. Davis, Barbara E. Smith, and Laura Nickles[21]

Purpose of Research

To assess the impact of two domestic violence projects implemented in
Milwaukee, Wisconsin. The first examined the effectiveness of a
specialized domestic violence court designed to speed up case processing
time. The second examined the effect of a subsequent change in the
district attorney's screening policy that admitted more cases into the
special court. 

Methods

Data were collected from each of three periods: prior to September 1994
(the start of the special domestic violence court), between September 1994
and January 1995 (the period after the special court began and before the
change in the district attorney's charging policy), and after January 1995
(after the change in the district attorney's charging policy). Data were
collected from prosecutors' files, police reports of new arrests for
offenders, and via interviews with victims.

Findings 

After the creation of the specialized court:

o Processing time was halved.

o Convictions were up by 25 percent.

o Pretrial crime declined.

o The prevalence of new felony arrests showed a slight but statistically
nonsignificant reduction.

After introduction of a new liberalized district attorney charging policy:

o Case backlog increased greatly.

o Cases filed with the court contained a higher proportion of victims who
did not want their cases prosecuted.

o Time to case disposition doubled.

o Convictions declined.

o Pretrial crime increased.

o Victim satisfaction with case outcomes and with the prosecutor's
handling of the case declined.

The researchers concluded as follows:

o The study produced evidence that the theory on which the domestic
violence court was based was sound. Reducing processing time produced
concomitant changes in convictions and opportunities for pretrial crime.

o What was accomplished in the Milwaukee domestic violence court was
highly significant. It is one of the few documented successful attempts to
address the problem of low convictions in domestic violence cases. It was
done without coercion of victims (as is the case in jurisdictions that
institute no-drop policies) and without additional resources.

o The district attorney's policy to prosecute a larger proportion of domestic
violence arrests had several effects, none of them positive, which may
have been due in part to insufficient allocation of resources. One effect of
the new policy was to bring into the court system a larger proportion of
cases with victims who were not interested in seeing the defendant
prosecuted. Victim satisfaction with prosecutors and with court outcomes
declined after the new screening policy. As the special court became
overwhelmed with cases, case processing time increased back to the level
that had existed prior to the start of the specialized court.

Implications for Criminal Court Officials

The researchers drew the following implications:

o Shortening court processing time in domestic violence cases is a good
idea. It has been shown to decrease pretrial crime and increase conviction
rates.

o Introducing domestic violence cases with reluctant victims into the
criminal justice system should be carefully considered. Potential benefits
may result, but negative results were noted in the Milwaukee study. These
types of cases were found to increase case processing time, increase
pretrial crime, decrease convictions, and decrease satisfaction with
prosecutor handling and court outcome.

o Should the decision be made to introduce cases with reluctant victims,
sufficient resources should be allocated to adequately prosecute and
adjudicate the cases. In Milwaukee, there was no increase in
victim/witness, prosecutorial, or judicial staff to handle twice the number
of cases the district attorney entered into the court system.

o In deciding whether or not to prosecute, the victim's voice should be
carefully considered. It may be justified to go counter to victims' wishes
not to prosecute in select cases where there is a clear indication (e.g., by
virtue of prior history and dangerousness of the defendant) that harm will
come to victims if defendants are not prosecuted. However, to completely
ignore victims' wishes is likely to produce a caseload with many
unwinnable cases and disgruntled victims.

-------------------------------

COURT-ORDERED TREATMENT

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

The Impact of Court-Ordered Treatment for Domestic Violence Offenders

by Adele Harrell[22]

Purpose of Research

To evaluate the impact of court-ordered treatment for domestic violence
abusers.

Methods

Research was based on quasi-experimental design with a total sample of
193 "male against female" misdemeanor domestic abuse offenders in five
district courts in Baltimore County, Maryland, between September 1988
and October 1989. Rotating judges with different treatment/nontreatment
preferences ordered the abusers to treatment in one of three available
treatment programs. The study compared 81 treated offenders with 112
offenders not ordered to treatment. The cessation of subsequent severe
violence, physical aggression, threats and the frequency of physical
aggression, and psychological abuse were measured by interviews with
victims and abusers 1 month after case disposition and again 4 to 6 months
later.

Findings[23]

Study comparisons of treated and nontreated offenders indicated:

o Treatment did not reduce the prevalence or frequency of violence:

--Treated and nontreated abusers were not significantly different in terms
of ceasing severe violence or threats of violence. Moreover, those not
treated were significantly less likely than those treated to continue
engaging in physical aggression.

--While psychological abuse occurred significantly less frequently for
treated abusers, treated and nontreated abusers were not significantly
different in terms of the frequency of physical aggression and threats of
violence. 

o Offender characteristics that did not reduce frequency of violence were
offender age, employment status, history of domestic violence, past
criminal history, children living with the victim, and violent victimization
of the offender as a child. Moreover, neither arresting the offender nor
deferring prosecution had a significant effect on the frequency of
posttreatment violence. 

The following variables affected the impact of treatment:

o Among cases with a history of severe violence, treated offenders who
were married to or living with the victim were significantly more likely to
cease severe violence.

o Among cases with a history of physical aggression, treated offenders
who were involved with drugs or alcohol use of whose victims had
children living with them were significantly more likely to cease physical
aggression.

o Treated offenders with a past criminal record were significantly more
likely than other offenders to be involved in a subsequent incident.

Implications for Judges and Court Practitioners

Courts need to closely examine:

o Practices such as long delays in hearing cases and in starting treatment
when ordering offenders to treatment.

o Monitoring of compliance with treatment orders and the provision of
sanctions for noncompliance.

o Victims' protection needs while offenders are in treatment.

o Alternative sanctions to be used in combination with or in place of
treatment that will protect the interests of victims of domestic violence.

-------------------------------

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

The Role of Drug and Alcohol Abuse in Domestic Violence and Its
Treatment: Dade County's Domestic Violence Court Experiment

by John S. Goldkamp, with Doris Weiland, Mark Collins and Michael
White[24]

Purpose of Research

To obtain baseline data on domestic violence offenders and offenses,
including data about the role of substance abuse in domestic violence and
the dropout and rearrest rates of those ordered to treatment; and to
compare the impact on treatment status and reinvolvement in the criminal
and civil justice systems of two treatment approaches for domestic
violence batterers: (1) the regular "dual" approach in which batterer
treatment and alcohol/drug treatment are separate, with substance abuse
treatment an "add-on" to batterer treatment and (2) a new "integrated"
approach merging substance abuse and batterer treatment.

Methods

The two-phase project took place in the specialized treatment-oriented
Dade County (Florida) Domestic Violence Court. The baseline study
included a review of misdemeanor cases processed in the court for a
1-year period prior to the availability of integrated batterer/substance
abuse treatment.

In the experiment, misdemeanor divertees and probationers ordered to
treatment for both substance abuse and battering between early June 1994
and late February 1995 were randomly assigned to either the regular dual
treatment process (n=140) or the new integrated treatment program
(n=210). The progress of individuals in both groups was observed for 7
months to determine treatment status and to chart reinvolvement in the
criminal and civil justice systems.

Findings

Among the findings in the baseline study of immediate relevance to the
followup treatment experiment were the following:

o Roughly half of misdemeanor defendants in entering cases were
involved in the abuse of alcohol and/or other drugs. However, fewer than
half of the defendants so involved were processed into substance abuse
treatment. Many of the cases with drug or alcohol involvement were
dismissed or "no-actioned."

o Slightly more than half of the defendants were diverted or placed on
probation. Nearly all divertees and probationers were assigned to domestic
violence treatment; about two-fifths were also assigned to substance abuse
evaluation and/or treatment.

o Large numbers of divertees and probationers assigned to treatment failed
to appear at treatment programs.

o Higher rearrest rates were found among divertees and probationers who
were not admitted to treatment. Rates of rearrest were lower for those who
were admitted and "continued in process."

o Higher treatment dropout rates were found among those substance
abuse-involved divertees and probationers who were assigned to batterer
treatment and substance abuse treatment in separate programs than among
those assigned to batterer programs only.

The treatment experiment yielded three statistically significant findings:

o The integrated treatment approach was far more successful than the dual
process in getting divertees and probationers to begin treatment (43
percent of the dual program participants never showed up for treatment
after intake compared to 13 percent of the integrated program
participants).

o The integrated approach was more successful than the dual process at
keeping participants in treatment (median of 160 days compared to 99).

o During the 7-month followup, participants in the integrated treatment
program were rearrested for same-victim domestic violence offenses at
less than half the rate of those assigned to dual programs (6 percent vs. 14
percent).

Implications for Judges [These implications are not explicit in the report
but appear to follow the findings.]

The following implications were drawn:

o Since the fact and length of treatment favorably impact rearrest rates,
judges should attempt to identify treatment programs that have
demonstrated the ability to admit and keep in treatment domestic violence
offenders with substance abuse problems, and should maintain contact
with offenders to ensure they are attending treatment. (It is difficult to
discern whether the treatment's effect on rearrest is because of the
treatment itself or because the offender had more contacts with the court.)

o When the option is available, judges should consider ordering domestic
violence offenders with substance abuse problems to integrated
batterer/substance abuse treatment programs rather than to separate
programs for batterer treatment and substance abuse treatment.

-------------------------------

OTHER

Selected Findings and Implications Drawn From

Corporate Sector Response to Domestic Violence

by Nancy E. Isaac[25]

Purpose of Research

To explore what role the corporate sector is playing in responding to
partner abuse as it impacts upon the health and safety of employees in the
workplace.

Methods

The research findings were based on (1) interviews with corporate
professionals in a variety of companies that examined their level of
awareness and attitudes about partner violence and its potential effects on
employees' work lives and (2) surveys with employee assistance
professionals (EAPs) that examined how the corporate sector views the
impact of partner violence on its employees.

Findings

The interview study found:

o Most executives and managers in the corporate sector have given little or
no thought to the impact of partner abuse on the health and safety of their
employees.

o Among larger companies, the EAP and security departments are the
most aware of the potential impact of partner abuse on employees' work
lives. There is little communication across departments within companies
about this issue.

o Potential barriers to understanding and helping employees who are
victims of partner abuse include lack of awareness, denial, embarrassment,
privacy and confidentiality concerns, victim blaming, expectations of
self-identification by abused women, fear of advocating for change, and
concern that outreach to abused women may alienate male employees,
damage the company image, or be too expensive.

The EAP survey found:

o A large majority of EAP providers have been faced with cases of partner
abuse, including restraining order violations and stalking in the workplace.

o General policies on "workplace violence" exist in many companies but
few specifically address domestic violence.

o There is increasing awareness among EAP staff that employees may
bring domestic violence problems to the EAP.

o Among larger corporations, EAP staff are using a range of practices to
assist employees impacted by abuse, including the use of a leave of
absence, medical leave, and short-term disability.

o EAP staff expressed an interest in learning more about partner abuse and
its potential impact on employees.

o Interaction with the criminal justice sector with respect to domestic
violence is limited. Only a handful of corporations have received training
from police or other criminal justice officials. Further, three-quarters of
EAP staff thought there was inadequate follow-through by the criminal
justice system when a case of partner abuse was reported.

Implications for Interactions Between Companies and the Criminal Justice
System

Companies should develop ties with the criminal justice sector.
Suggestions included:

o Inviting local law enforcement officials to train key corporate staff and
to provide an overview of local, State, and Federal statutes related to
family violence.

o Developing ongoing contacts in criminal justice agencies and in
particular in the domestic violence units of local law enforcement and
prosecutor's offices.

-------------------------------

Statistical Reports on Family Violence

Child Maltreatment 1995: Report From the States to the National Child
Abuse and Neglect Data System, annual report, U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, 1997

(The) Crime of Stalking: How Big Is the Problem?, summary of a
presentation by Patricia Tjaden, Center for Policy Research, National
Institute of Justice "Research Preview," November 1996

Criminal Victimization in the United States, 1994: A National Crime
Victimization Survey Report, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Tina Dorsey and
Jayne Robinson, May 1997 (NCJ 162126)*

(The) Cycle of Violence, National Institute of Justice "Research in Brief,"
Cathy Spatz Widom, October 1992 (NCJ 136607)*

Domestic Violence and Sexual Violence Data Collection: A Report to
Congress Under the Violence Against Women Act, Justice Research and
Statistics Association, James Zepp, a joint publication of the National
Institute of Justice and the Bureau of Justice Statistics, July 1996 (NCJ
161405)*

Domestic Violence, Stalking, and Antistalking Legislation: An Annual
Report to Congress under the Violence Against Women Act, Mary
Graham, ed., National Institute of Justice, April 1996 (NCJ 160943)*

Drugs, Alcohol, and Domestic Violence in Memphis, summary of a
presentation by Daniel Brookoff, National Institute of Justice "Research
Preview," October 1997

Elderly Crime Victims, Bureau of Justice Statistics "Selected Findings"
from the National Crime Victimization Survey, March 1994 (NCJ
147186)* 

Female Victims of Violent Crime, Bureau of Justice Statistics, December
1996 (NCJ 162602)*

Murder in Families, Bureau of Justice Statistics "Special Report," John M.
Dawson and Patrick A. Langan, July 1994 (NCJ 143498)*

Partner Violence Among Young Adults, summary of a presentation by
Terrie E. Moffitt, National Institute of Justice "Research Preview," April
1997

Sex Differences in Violent Victimization, 1994, Bureau of Justice
Statistics "Special Report," Diane Craven, September 1997 (NCJ
164508)*

Spouse Murder Defendants in Large Urban Counties, Bureau of Justice
Statistics "Executive Summary," Patrick A. Langan and John M. Dawson,
September 1995 (NCJ 156831)*; full report, October 1995 (NCJ 153256)*

Stalking in America: Findings from the National Violence Against
Women Survey, Patricia Tjaden and Nancy Thoennes, Center for Policy
Research, July 1997 (NIJ grant #93-IJ-CX-0012)

Third National Incidence Study of Child Abuse and Neglect, U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, 1996

Violence Against Women: Estimates from the Redesigned Survey, Bureau
of Justice Statistics "Special Report" on the National Crime Victimization
Survey, Ronet Bachman and Linda E. Saltzman, August 1995 (NCJ
154348)*

Violence Against Women: A National Crime Victimization Survey
Report, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Ronet Bachman, January 1994 (NCJ
145325)*

Violence Between Intimates, Bureau of Justice Statistics, November 1994
(NCJ 149259)*

Violence Between Intimates: 1992-1995, Bureau of Justice Statistics,
forthcoming (NCJ 167237)*

*NCJ documents can be obtained from the National Criminal Justice
Reference Service. Most are free of charge. E-mail at "askncjrs" or call
800-851-3420.

-------------------------------

For more information on the National Institute of Justice, please contact:

National Criminal Justice Reference Service
Box 6000
Rockville, MD 20849-6000
800-851-3420
e-mail: askncjrs@ncjrs.org

To access the World Wide Web site, go to http://www.ncjrs.org

If you have any questions, call or e-mail NCJRS.

-------------------------------

About the National Institute of Justice 

The National Institute of Justice (NIJ), a component of the Office of
Justice Programs, is the research agency of the U.S. Department of Justice.
Created by the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, as
amended, NIJ is authorized to support research, evaluation, and
demonstration programs, development of technology, and both national
and international information dissemination. Specific mandates of the Act
direct NIJ to: 

o Sponsor special projects, and research and development programs, that
will improve and strengthen the criminal justice system and reduce or
prevent crime. 

o Conduct national demonstration projects that employ innovative or
promising approaches for improving criminal justice. 

o Develop new technologies to fight crime and improve criminal justice. 

o Evaluate the effectiveness of criminal justice programs and identify
programs that promise to be successful if continued or repeated. 

o Recommend actions that can be taken by Federal, State, and local
governments as well as by private organizations to improve criminal
justice. 

o Carry out research on criminal behavior. 

o Develop new methods of crime prevention and reduction of crime and
delinquency. 

In recent years, NIJ has greatly expanded its initiatives, the result of the
Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994 (the Crime
Act), partnerships with other Federal agencies and private foundations,
advances in technology, and a new international focus. Some examples of
these new initiatives: 

o New research and evaluation are exploring key issues in community
policing, violence against women, sentencing reforms, and specialized
courts such as drug courts. 

o Dual-use technologies are being developed to support national defense
and local law enforcement needs. 

o The causes, treatment, and prevention of violence against women and
violence within the family are being investigated in cooperation with
several agencies of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 

o NIJ's links with the international community are being strengthened
through membership in the United Nations network of criminological
institutes; participation in developing the U.N. Criminal Justice
Information Network; initiation of UNOJUST (U.N. Online Justice
Clearinghouse), which electronically links the institutes to the U.N.
network; and establishment of an NIJ International Center. 

o The NIJ-administered criminal justice information clearinghouse, the
world's largest, has improved its online capability. 

o The Institute's Drug Use Forecasting (DUF) program has been expanded
and enhanced. Renamed ADAM (Arrestee Drug Abuse Monitoring), the
program will increase the number of drug-testing sites, and its role as a
"platform" for studying drug-related crime will grow. 

o NIJ's new Crime Mapping Research Center will provide training in
computer mapping technology, collect and archive geocoded crime data,
and develop analytic software. 

o The Institute's program of intramural research has been expanded and
enhanced. 

The Institute Director, who is appointed by the President and confirmed by
the Senate, establishes the Institute's objectives, guided by the priorities of
the Office of Justice Programs, the Department of Justice, and the needs of
the criminal justice field. The Institute actively solicits the views of
criminal justice professionals and researchers in the continuing search for
answers that inform public policymaking in crime and justice.

-------------------------------

Notes

Chapter 1

1. From a Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice, April 1994, NCJ 146414.

2. From Child Victims as Witnesses: What the Research Says, Newton,
MA: Education Development Center, Inc., 1993.

3. From Journal of Applied Psychology, 77(5) (1992), 744-756.

4. From an Executive Summary submitted to the National Institute of
Justice, May 1996, NIJ grant #94-IJ-CX-0054 to the American Bar
Association. Elstein, Smith, and Davidson represented the American Bar
Association on this project; Rebovich, Free, Ells, and Sempel represented
the American Prosecutors Research Institute.

5. From Child Abuse and Neglect, 17(5) (1993), 613-622.

6. From a Final Report, American Bar Association's Center on Children
and the Law, submitted to the National Center on Child Abuse and
Neglect, September 30, 1993.

7. From a Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice and the Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention, June 1995, NCJ 152978.

8. From an Executive Summary submitted to the National Institute of
Justice and the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,
under NIJ grant #92-IJ-CX-K041, in cooperation with the National Center
on Child Abuse and Neglect, by the American Bar Association Center on
Children and the Law; Westat, Inc.; James Bell Associates; and the
Research Triangle Institute, February 1996.

9. From an Executive Summary under National Institute of Justice grant #
92-IJ-CX-K034 to the Education Development Center, Inc., and the
American Bar Association Center on Children and the Law. The Full
Report published in 1995 is available through the National Criminal
Justice Reference Service, NCJ 161835.

10. From a Final Report to the State Justice Institute under grant #SJI-88-
11J-E-015 to the American Bar Association, January 1990.

11. From a Research in Brief, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of
Justice, National Institute of Justice, January 1997, NCJ 163387.

12. From Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 53(5) (1985),
657-665.

13. From a Final Report to the National Institute of Justice under grant
#93-IJ-CX-0042, published by the Urban Institute, December 1995.

Chapter 2

1. From a Final Report, National Aging Resource Center on Elder Abuse
(NARCEA), April 1992.

2. From the Journal of Elder Abuse & Neglect, 6(2) (1994), 9-21.

3. From a publication of the American Bar Association Commission on
Legal Problems of the Elderly, developed under State Justice Institute
grant #SJI-93-12J-E-274, 1995.

Chapter 3

1. In 1997, the U.S. Department of Justice's Violence Against Women
Grants Office (VAWGO) launched an initiative to identify and develop
promising practices for law enforcement, prosecution, the courts, and
victim services. Findings from expert panels, a national survey of
hundreds of practitioners, and indepth interviews with practitioners will be
published in the spring of 1998 as a manual to help States and subgrantees
with Federal Violence Against Women Act funds draw on the most
promising practices in their fields. In the meantime, VAWGO has released
a document entitled "Assessing Justice System Response to Violence
Against Women" that contains checklists for each discipline,
supplemented by selected program profiles. It is available on the VAWGO
Web page (http://www.vaw.umn.edu), or by calling 800-256-5883. 

2. Many advocacy groups, including the American Bar Association
Commission on Domestic Violence, recommend that safety planning be
conducted regularly with all victims of domestic violence. The
Commission also recommends the development of "one-stop shopping"
for victim services or intake centers in courts, at shelters, or at police
stations.

3. In 1997, the American Bar Association adopted a resolution recognizing
that "no drop" prosecutions can be very helpful in sparing victims from the
sole responsibility for prosecuting their batterers but at the same time
urging that such prosecutions be undertaken with great care to ensure
victims' protection.

4. The Federal Violence Against Women Act of 1994 encourages police
departments to adopt either proarrest or mandatory arrest policies (42
U.S.C. 3796hh(b)(1) and (c)(1)). The American Bar Association has
endorsed the adoption of proarrest policies (February 1997).

5. The Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Research Unit
is supported by the New Zealand Health Research Council. This research
was supported by grant #94-IJ-CX-0041 from the National Institute of
Justice. Additional support was provided by U.S. Public Health Service
(USPHS) grant MH-45070 to Terrie E. Moffitt from the Violence and
Traumatic Stress Research Branch of the National Institute of Mental
Health, by USPHS grant MH-49414 to Avshalom Caspi from the
Personality and Social Processes Branch of the National Institute of
Mental Health, by the William T. Grant Foundation, and by the William
Freeman Vilas Trust at the University of Wisconsin. Forthcoming in 1998.

6. From research undertaken by the Center for Justice Research and
Education at Lamar University (Texas) for the Florida Governor's Task
Force on Domestic and Sexual Violence; funded by grant #95-WF-NX-
0012 from the Stop Violence Against Women program, Bureau of Justice
Assistance, U.S. Department of Justice. For further information, contact
Robin Hassler, Executive Director, Governor's Task Force on Domestic
and Sexual Violence, 2555 Shumard Boulevard, Tallahassee, Florida
32399-2100.

7. These figures continue to be updated as new data (e.g., cases solved)
and access to additional data sources(e.g., child and protective services
case files) are obtained.

8. From an Issues and Practices Report prepared for the National Institute
of Justice by Abt Associates Inc., Contract #OJP-86-C-002, published by
the National Institute of Justice, March 1990, NCJ 123263. Since this
groundbreaking study was published in 1990, there have been a number of
changes regarding the issuance of protection orders, some likely as a result
of the problems flagged in the report. For example, many jurisdictions
now provide 24-hour access to protection orders and improved court forms
or computerized filing and petition procedures. Many States have enacted
statutes making violations of protection orders a matter of criminal
contempt, a misdemeanor, or even a felony. Federal law now makes
mutual protection orders issued in violation of due process unenforceable
and prohibits abusers convicted of domestic violence or having
outstanding protection orders against them from possessing firearms.
Finally, increased emphasis has been placed on substantive criminal
prosecutions of domestic violence.

9. From Civil Protection Orders: The Benefits and Limitations for Victims
of Domestic Violence, an Executive Summary of a National Center for
State Courts study funded by the National Institute of Justice under grant
#93-IJ-CX-0035, 1997, NCJ 164866.

10. From Do Arrests and Restraining Orders Work?, edited by Eve S.
Buzawa and Carl G. Buzawa, Sage Publications, 1996. The research was
supported by the State Justice Institute, grant #SJI-90-12L-E-054.

11. From Do Arrests and Restraining Orders Work?, edited by Eve S.
Buzawa and Carl G. Buzawa, Sage Publications, 1996.

12. From Do Arrests and Restraining Orders Work?, edited by Eve S.
Buzawa and Carl G. Buzawa, Sage Publications, 1996.

13. From New England Law Review, 28 (Summer 1994), 929.

14. From Do Arrests and Restraining Orders Work?, edited by Eve S.
Buzawa and Carl G. Buzawa, Sage Publications, 1996.

15. From American Behavioral Scientist, 36 (5) (May 1993), 610-623.

16. From Do Arrests and Restraining Orders Work?, edited by Eve S.
Buzawa and Carl G. Buzawa, Sage Publications, 1996. The study was
funded under National Institute of Justice grant #93-IJ-CX-0039.

17. From a Final Report submitted to the National Institute of Justice,
October 1993, NCJ 157870. Research was conducted under NIJ grant #86-
IJ-CX-0012 by David A. Ford, Department of Sociology, Indiana
University at Indianapolis and University Research Associates, and by
Mary Jean Regoli, Indiana University at Bloomington.

18. From an edited version of a review paper prepared by Mary Ann
Dutton, "The Validity and Use of Evidence Concerning Battering and Its
Effects in Criminal Trials: A Report to Congress Under the Violence
Against Women Act," Research Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice and the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Mental
Health, May 1996, NCJ 160972.

19. From The Validity and Use of Evidence Concerning Battering and Its
Effects in Criminal Trials: A Report to Congress under the Violence
Against Women Act, Research Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice and U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Mental Health, May
1996, NCJ 160972.

20. From The Validity and Use of Evidence Concerning Battering and its
Effects in Criminal Trials: A Report to Congress under the Violence
Against Women Act, Research Report, Washington, D.C.: U.S.
Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice and U.S. Department
of Health and Human Services, National Institute of Mental Health, May
1996, NCJ 160972.

21. From a Final Report to the National Institute of Justice by the
American Bar Association's Criminal Justice Section; funded by NIJ grant
#95-IJ-CX-0105, April 1997, NCJ 169111.

22. From a Paper presented at the 44th Annual Meeting of The American
Society of Criminology, New Orleans, Louisiana, November 4-7, 1992.
The research was supported by the State Justice Institute, grant #90-12L-
E-089.

23. Researcher's caution: The treatment programs studied may have been
too short or insufficiently intense, or may have used ineffective strategies;
they may have been inadequately implemented; or their failure to sanction
for noncompliance may have reduced the treatment impact. The author
recommends that the study be replicated.

24. From the Executive Summary of a Crime and Justice Research
Institute study funded by the National Institute of Justice, grant #93-IJ-
CX-0028, June 1994, NCJ 163411. The findings--particularly from the
baseline study--were broader than those directly relevant to substance
abuse that are described here.

25. From a Summary Report to National Institute of Justice under grant
#94-IJ-CX-0050 to the Harvard School of Public Health, 1997, NCJ
166616.