Battered Woman's Syndrome

**History**

Most people personally know or know someone who knows a woman who has been battered and beaten by her partner, most often a male. Some violence extends as far as the woman killing her batterer. During the 1960’s and 1970’s public awareness of domestic abuse began to rise.  In the 1970’s Dr. Lenore Walker introduced the term Battered Woman Syndrome (BWS) into the courts as a self-defense strategy. It was developed to help justify the woman’s behavior to the jury and has become increasingly popular in use. There are a few critics of the current use of BWS and there are suggested alternative strategies. Social Agency Framework (SAF) testimony involves a different kind of expert testimony that tries to explain the behavior and situations rather than diagnose the woman with a deficit or syndrome.

Thousands of people are involved in violence each day, some the perpetrators others the victims. Streets are filled with gangs, guns, and men are taught to be “tough.” Society sees and hears about violence every day on the news, it is witnessed on TV, and kids play violent video games. According to the Domestic Violence Statistics, “One in four women have experienced domestic violence in her lifetime”. Sometimes this domestic violence reaches the point of death. Either the day comes where that beating is just too much, the perpetrator goes too far, and the woman is no longer living the nightmare, or the woman defends herself and the man is no longer breaking bones and stealing souls.

When cases of a battered woman killing her abuser reach the court system, the defense is most often self-defense. Mary Helen Wimberly notes that during the 1970s, to confront the sex bias that was prevalent in the court systems, particularly in self-defenses cases, Battered Woman’s Syndrome (BWS) was introduced. This type of expert testimony was created to help justify the battered woman’s action and explain her behavior. Although, over the years, the more it has been used, the more critics it has accumulated.

Some believe that BWS has become more labeling the victim with pathology and less of an effective defense. Those who do critique BWS have found or proposed alternatives. Schuller and Hastings (1996) did an experiment with a new type of expert testimony, Social Agency Framework (SAF), that involves focusing on behavior rather than labeling pathology. Both types of expert testimony (BWS and SAF) are used in self-defense cases, which can be tricky to prove.

**Research**

The way self-defense is currently defined can make it challenging for some of the battered woman’s self-defense cases to qualify. Costanzo and Krauss (2012) list three parts of qualifying for self-defense; “imminent bodily harm,” the force used was “reasonable and proportional to the danger that existed,” and “no reasonable avenue of escape existed.” Many women who kill their batterers do so during a direct confrontation, like an assault. On the other hand, some women feel that their abuser could overpower them during an actual physical attack. These women may wait until the man is sleeping or maybe in a drunken state to make their move.

It is in these cases where self-defense gets a little harder to prove. Schuller, Wells, Rzepa, & Klippenstine (2004) report that to “successfully advance a plea of self-defense, the battered woman who has killed her abuser must convince a jury of the “'reasonableness' of her lethal actions.” . Battered Woman’s Syndrome is the most popular type of expert witness testimony used to assist a woman’s self-defense plea.

**Battered Women’s Syndrome**

Lenore E. Walker, in 1979, wrote a book titled “The Battered Woman Syndrome,” which is when BWS first emerged. Ewing (1990) summarizes some of Walker's key points about BWS, explaining there is a “three phase cycle”; including a “tension-building phase,” “acute battering incident,” and the third “a loving contrition”. Essentially the couple starts to argue or “build tension” which often involves verbal and emotional abuse/trauma, escalating into the man beating the woman. This beating can be physical and sometimes sexual and involves coercion against the woman’s will. Then comes phase three, when the man is apologetic and loving, brings roses, and promises never to hurt them again.

These women get stuck in this cycle, and a term proposed by Seligman called “learned helplessness” is involved as well. Morris and Maisto (1999) (as cited in Plumm & Terrance, 2009) say, “Learned helplessness refers to the failure to avoid or escape from an unpleasant or aversive stimulus that occurs as a result of previous exposure to similar stimuli” . The woman essentially becomes passive to the abuse. There are other factors that can be involved in keeping the woman in this abusive relationship. Perhaps there are children, and/or the man provides all the financial resources, or the woman has nowhere else to go with no support or help, just for a few examples.

**Social Agency Framework**

The second type of expert witness testimony in self-defense cases where the battered woman kills her abuser is Social Agency Framework (SAF). Plumm and Terrance (2009) say SAF testimony “highlights the inadequacies that exist within formal help sources as well as the threats a battered woman may face while seeking help” . A battered woman may also face “retaliation violence” that occurs when she leaves; the man may hunt her down and hurt and/or kill her for leaving.

This type of testimony addresses the context in which these women live, their lack of alternatives, and the numerous obstacles they face. In this testimony, “the expert clearly emphasizes that the syndrome is a normal reaction to a dangerous situation, as opposed to a personality of psychological disorder, any misperception or confusion with images of pathology can be avoided” . While similar to BWS, SAF is different by not labeling the woman with a “psychological pathology”.

Despite empirical evidence found and reported by research psychologists highlighting the flaws with BWS it is still routinely admitted in court. Unlike BWS, SAF testimony does not create a stereotype that battered women must conform to or meet; in other words, there are no specific criteria for these women to meet . SAF can also make jurors think differently and produce more empathy rather than just sympathy for the victim/defendant.

Instead of seeing the woman as having something “wrong” with her, the jurors are told about her specific obstacles, factors, and context. The jurors are put more in the “shoes” of the woman and produce more empathy than when presented with BWS testimony. Plumm & Terrance (2009) did experiments with mock jurors and inducing empathy in the jurors. They found that when the jurors experienced empathy, they were less likely to convict and more likely to see the actions as just and lawful .

**Critics**

Labeling woman with a “psychological pathology” is one of the main critiques of Battered Woman's Syndrome. It makes the woman seem deficit and blames the victim for having this “syndrome” rather than explaining the context and obstacles involved. Another criticism Costanzo & Krauss (2012) point out is that there were flaws with Walker's original experiments. Less than half of the women who participated in the study experienced all three “phases of violence” proposed as a central part of BWS. This limits the data on how much the cycle is present. Another flaw Costanzo & Krauss (2012) noticed with the study is that the experimenters possibly suffered experimental bias because they knew the hypothesis and perhaps were looking for results to confirm it . Another common critique is that BWS has moved from a psychological justification to more of an excuse.

The syndrome proposes that the woman has mental issues, lacks the motivational ability, that they have behavioral problems – (like learned helplessness), and that psychologically they lack the capacity to escape or leave . There is also variability in the “symptoms” of the syndrome. Not all women display the same symptoms or have the same situations or reactions. Specifically, Wimberly says, “applying excuse theory to a battered woman’s act of self-defense reinforces the idea that domestic violence is a private, personal problem” . This type of “excuse” rather than justification does not always work in favor of the defendant. Especially in cases where it is hard to prove self-defense, BWS usually ends up with a convicted verdict rather than not guilty.

The most common type of case where it is complicated to prove self-defense is when the woman waits until her abuser is asleep or incapacitated by drugs or alcohol. Hodell, Dunlap, Wasarhaley, & Golding (2012) report, “Unfortunately for battered women who kill their abusers, the present study suggests women who kill their abuser when he is sleeping are more likely to face conviction than woman who kill their abuser when he is awake” . Presenting BWS testimony does not seem to help improve those conviction rates much, and in some cases, does more harm than good. Overall, Social Agency Framework expert testimony appears to be more effective and produces better outcomes for battered women.

**Battered Women's Syndrome and the LGBTQPIA+ Community**

Battered Women's Syndrome is often a term that is not associated with the LGBTQPIA+ community. There are a few reasons for this lack of association. While there is a lack of association it does not mean that people who identify as a part of the LGBTQPIA+ community cannot be "battered women". One of the reasons that members of this community in particular are not considered to be "battered women" is because of the long standing notion that for a woman to be "Battered" she must be batted by a man. Additionally, there is further struggle for women in a queer relationship because they do not conform to the heteronormative culture that society values and bases laws upon. These struggles against heteronormative culture are experiences first hand by queer women when they are looking to stay in a shelter to be protected from their partner. According to VanNatta et al (2005) that Shelters ask for the identity of who battered the woman which then places queer women in a difficult situation because they either have to share their gender identity or lie about their partner.In addition, there is a history of lack of social acceptance of queer women that can be seen in shelters.

Additionally, there are further implication with regard to the legal defense of Battered Women Syndrome for members of the LGBTQPIA+ Community. In the cases where a women have utilized the Battered Women syndrome defense and in a queer relationship the jury and results are not the same as if a heterosexual woman says she is a battered. These disparities are indicative of the need to expanded the definition of what it means to be a battered woman.With further expansion of what it means to be a battered woman it can lead to providing resources to more than just heterosexual women. Lastly, there is a great need for care and shelters that is specific for members of the LGBTQPIA+ community and their needs that go beyond traditional care.

**Further Reading:**

1. Downs, D. A. (1996). *More than victims: battered women, the syndrome society, and the law* (Ser. Morality and society). University of Chicago Press.
2. Walker, L. E. (2009). *The battered woman syndrome: with research associates* (3rd ed.). Springer.
3. Bauman, Sonja, "Battered Women Who Kill: Stereotype Influence Through The Media" (2018). Theses and Dissertations. 2165. https://commons.und.edu/theses/2165

**References**

1. ↑ Campbell J. C. (1990). Battered woman syndrome: a critical review. *Violence Update*, *1*(4), 1–11.
2. ↑ Faigman, D. L., & Wright, A. J. (1997). The battered woman syndrome in the age of science. *Ariz. L. Rev.*, *39*, 67.
3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 Walker, L. E. (1991). Post-traumatic stress disorder in women: Diagnosis and treatment of battered woman syndrome. *Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training*, *28*(1), 21.
4. ↑ 4.0 4.1 Walker, L. E. (2006). Battered woman syndrome: Empirical findings. *Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences*, *1087*(1), 142-157.
5. ↑ Sheehy, E., Stubbs, J., & Tolmie, J. (1992). Defending battered women on trial: The battered woman syndrome and its limitations. *Criminal Law Journal*,16, 369-395
6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 6.2 Schuller, R. A., Wells, E., Rzepa, S., & Klippenstine, M. A. (2004). Rethinking battered woman syndrome evidence: The impact of alternative forms of expert testimony on mock jurors' decisions. *Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne Des Sciences Du Comportement, 36*(2), 127-136. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0087223
7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 7.2 7.3 Costanzo, M. & Krauss, D. (2012) *Forensic and Legal Psychology* (1st ed.) New York, NY: Worth Publishers.
8. ↑ Domestic Violence Statistics (n.d.) Retrieved from http://www.dvrc-or.org/domestic/violence/resources/C61/
9. ↑ 9.0 9.1 9.2 Wimberly, M. H. (n.d.) Defending Victims of Domestic Violence Who Kill their Batteres: Using Trial Expert to Change Social Norms. Retrieved from http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/migrated/domviol/docs/Wimberly.authcheckdam.pdf.
10. ↑ Stark, E. (1994). Representing woman battering: From battered woman syndrome to coercive control. *Alb. L. Rev.*, *58*, 973.
11. ↑ 11.0 11.1 Schuller, R. A., & Hastings, P. A. (1996). Trials of battered women who kill: The impact of alternative forms of expert evidence. *Law and Human Behavior, 20*(2), 167-187. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01499353
12. ↑ 12.0 12.1 Hodell, E. C., Dunlap, E. E., Wasarhaley, N. E., & Golding, J. M. (2012). Factors impacting juror perceptions of battered women who kill their abusers: Delay and sleeping status. *Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 18*(2), 338-359. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0025145
13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 Ewing, C. P. (1990). Psychological self-defense: A proposed justification for battered women who kill. *Law and Human Behavior,14*(6), 579-594. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF01044883
14. ↑ Dutton, M. A. (1993). Understanding women's responses to domestic violence: A redefinition of battered woman syndrome. *Hofstra Law Review*, *21*(4), 2.
15. ↑ 15.0 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 15.5 15.6 15.7 Plumm, K. M., & Terrance, C. A. (2009). Battered women who kill. the impact of expert testimony and empathy induction in the courtroom. *Violence Against Women, 15*(2), 186-205. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1077801208329145
16. ↑ 16.0 16.1 Rothenberg, B. (2003). “We Don’t Have Time for Social Change”: Cultural Compromise and the Battered Woman Syndrome. *Gender and Society*, *17*(5), 771–787. http://www.jstor.org/stable/3594709
17. ↑ Mahoney, M. (1991). Legal images of battered women: Redefining the issue of separation. *Michigan Law Review*, 90, 1-94.
18. ↑ Faigman, D. L. (1986). The battered woman syndrome and self-defense: A legal and empirical dissent. *Virginia Law Review*, 619-647.
19. ↑ Jenkins, P., & Davidson, B. (1990). Battered women in the criminal justice system: An analysis of gender stereotypes. *Behavioral Sciences and the Law*, 8, 171-180.
20. ↑ Swanson R. W. (1984). Battered wife syndrome. *Canadian Medical Association journal*, *130*(6), 709–712.
21. ↑ Stein, A. (2012). Engendered self-states: Dissociated affect, social discourse, and the forfeiture of agency in battered women. *Psychoanalytic Psychology, 29*(1), 34-58. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0024880
22. ↑ 22.0 22.1 Wispe, L. (1986). The distinction between sympathy and empathy: To call forth a concept, a word is needed. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology*,50, 314-321.
23. ↑ Cornia, Rebecca D. (1997). Current Use of Battered Woman Syndrome: Institutionalization of     Negative Stereotypes about Women. *UCLA Women's Law Journal*, 8(1). Doi:      10.5070/L381017687
24. ↑ Cutler, J. M (1989) Criminal Law - *Battered Woman Syndrome: The Killing of a Passive Victim - A Perfect Defense or a Perfect Crime?* - State v. Norman, 11 Campbell L. Rev. 263 (1989).
25. ↑ McCaul, K., Veltum, L., Boyechko, V., & Crawford, J. (1990). Understanding attributions of victim blame for rape: Sex, violence, and foreseeability. *Journal of Applied Social Psychology*, 20, 1-26.
26. ↑ Schuller, R., & Rzepa, S. (2002). Expert testimony pertaining to battered woman syndrome: Its impact on jurors’ decisions. *Law and Human Behavior,*26, 655-673.
27. ↑ Doyle, Meredith C., "Gender Inequality in the Law: Deficiencies of Battered Woman Syndrome and a New Solution to Closing the Gender Gap in Self-Defense Law" (2011). CMC Senior Theses. Paper 149. http://scholarship.claremont.edu/cmc\_theses/149
28. ↑ Allard, S. A. (1991). Rethinking battered woman syndrome: A black feminist perspective. *UCLA            Women's LJ*, *1*, 191.
29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 29.2 29.3 29.4 29.5 VanNatta, M. (2005). Constructing the battered woman. *Feminist Studies, 31*(2), 416-443,452.
30. ↑ Berg, K. K. (2014). Cultural Factors in the Treatment of Battered Women With Privilege: Domestic Violence in the Lives of White European-American, Middle-Class, Heterosexual Women. *Affilia*, *29*(2), 142–152.
31. ↑ 31.0 31.1 Ahumada, T., & Milena, A. (2012). The Applicability of the Battered Woman Syndrome (BWS) Model to Gay Males and Lesbian Women Who Kill Their Intimate Batterers in Self-defence.