Victims' voices and victims' choices in three IPV courts

Criminal Protection Orders: Implications of Requested Versus Issued Orders on Domestic Violence Revictimiztion and Mental Health Among Women

Criminal protection orders (POs), with varying degrees of restrictions on offenders' behavior, are issued by the criminal justice (CJ) system to enhance the safety and well-being of victims of domestic violence (DV). Yet, little research exists to elucidate outcomes associated with their issuance, and no research has examined outcomes of POs that are issued with greater restrictions than what victims requested. Among 187 women who were victims in a criminal DV case with a male intimate partner and who voiced their preference about a PO in the court system, this study examined if women's DV revictimization by their partner and mental health (i.e., posttraumatic stress disorder and depression symptom severity, perceived stress, and fear) are differentially impacted by whether criminal POs issued by the court were more restrictive than what was requested by victims. Results showed that regardless of whether the level of criminal PO issued was more restrictive or not, victims reported significant decreases in victimization and improvement in mental health over time. However, there was greater benefit regarding victimization and mental health outcomes in the degree of change over time for victims with POs that were not more restrictive than those whose POs were more restrictive. Findings are discussed in the context of Therapeutic Jurisprudence and survivor-defined practice, which underscore the importance of victims' input and requests in criminal PO proceedings.

Criminal Protection Orders Among Women Victims of Intimate Partner Violence: Women's Experiences of Court Decisions, Processes, and Their Willingness to Engage With the System in the Future

Consistent with a therapeutic jurisprudence framework, court decisions and processes can have a therapeutic or antitherapeutic effect on intimate partner violence (IPV) victims. To maximize therapeutic effects, IPV scholars have advocated for survivor-defined practices that emphasize the importance of engaging with victims in a collaborative manner that promotes autonomy, choice, and control. However, limited research exists in the context of criminal protection orders (POs). The current study addressed this gap by assessing whether criminal PO match (whether victims received the level PO they requested [i.e., PO match] or not [i.e., PO mismatch]) and victims' subjective experiences of the court process were associated with their willingness to use the system in the future to address IPV. In a sample of 187 women whose partners were arrested for IPV, experiencing the court processes as positive (β = .36, p = .001) and court-related fear (β = .41, p < .001) were positively associated with willingness to use the system in the future. Additionally, PO match moderated the association between subjective court experiences and willingness to use the system in the future. Experiencing the court processes as negative (b = .33, p = .005) and validating (b = -.36, p = .001) was associated with willingness to use the system in the future only for participants who did not receive the PO level they requested. While experiencing the court as positive (b = -.40, p ≤ .001) was associated with willingness to use the system regardless of PO match, it was most strongly associated for participants who did not receive the PO level they requested. Results suggest the importance of ascertaining strategies to improve victims' experiences with the court, especially when victims' requests are not met, to increase future engagement with the system.

Mediating Justice: Women's Perceptions of Fairness in the Civil Protection Order Process

Mediation use has grown rapidly in the past few decades as an efficacious method of civil dispute resolution. However, early research suggests that civil mediation may cause further harm to victims of intimate partner abuse because, based on the inherent power dynamics of abusive relationships, they are not able to effectively advocate on their own behalf. In addition, organizational efficiency concerns have led to the development of consent processes for civil protection orders (POs). However, research has yet to examine the extent to which victims of intimate partner violence who take part in these consent processes perceive the process and associated outcomes as fair. Using qualitative data (N = 19 interviews) collected from women who sought civil POs through Family Court in Delaware, this research finds that the consent process and women's interactions with mediators reproduce power inequalities that are inherent in cases of intimate partner abuse, which shape their perceptions of fairness in the PO process and outcomes. Victims being silenced and disempowered throughout the consent process results in cumulative effects-similar tactics used by batterers-which continue to leave victims vulnerable. In addition, the power asymmetry victims experience in abusive relationships is replicated by the legal institution and court structure in terms of not having access to attorneys, not receiving guidance and advocacy, and, at times, experiencing insensitive treatment. Thus, this study provides insight into the inequalities present within the PO consent process that can create further harm to victims.