Domestic Violence - changes of law through history.

Introduction

Wife beating has been condoned throughout most of history. Until the nineteenth century British Law gave husbands the right to beat their wives for what was called ‘lawful correction’. This tradition was summarised by Blackstone in the late eighteenth century as follows:

The husband also might give his wife moderate correction. For as he is to answer for her misbehaviour the law thought it reasonable to entrust him with this power of restraining her, by domestic chastisement in the same moderation that a man is allowed to correct hi servant or children. (Blackstone, 1996,vol1,432, cited in Pahl 1985)

It was not until 1891 that the right of a husband to beat his wife was abolished.

Throughout this essay I will be considering the more recent changes and challenges presented to police by the developments in the social acceptance of equality between partners and the development of a more victim orientated style of policing the domestic dispute. I will also be considering whether the current policing response is appropriate and what can be done in the future to identify and reduce domestic violence and assist victims.

History of Domestic Violence Policing

Prior to the 1970s violence against women in the home was generally thought of as a private matter. Couples were left a lone to sort out their differences except in cases involving serious injury.

In 1975 the police considered the powers they had were quite adequate to deal with the problem.

‘The offences against the person Act 1861, which in the main covers the whole field of this subject, has been in operation for many years now and the penalties and powers under that and other acts appear amply adequate.’ (Select Committee on Violence in Marriage, 1975 p377, cited in Pahl)

Even as late as the 1980s (Pahl, p115), noted the police response was often a chauvinistic one. When dealing with an allegation that a husband was being unfairly derogatory to his wife, officers were noted as giving advice ‘to forget all about it and start worrying about the children’

Reiner found officers struggled between what was expected of them and what happened in reality situations.

He found ‘the logic of officers in many cases was along the lines of why take it seriously if the victims are not taking the matter seriously. (see Reiner 2000, p.135).

In Pahl (1985) several cases were discussed, having been witnessed by the author, Where following a man being arrested for domestic violence and a case being prepared for court the victim, in most cases the wife withdraws support for prosecution.

The police view is summarised as follows

‘…From the police view we’ve got no axe to grind, we couldn’t care less, but it does seem a lot of public money being wasted in prosecution which when it gets to court she is all for having it scrubbed…’ (Pahl p117)

This is a preview of the whole essay

The police view is summarised as follows

It is also worth thinking about the nature of domestic violence in relation to how it is viewed within society. We have already noted that there has been a shift from treating domestic violence as a private, civil matter towards being a criminal, public concern. However, the Government has stated that we need to go beyond this framework and see domestic violence as “unacceptable in itself” (Home Office 1999).

This is expressed further within the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 in which local authorities, through partnerships with the appropriate local bodies, must “actively identify the nature and profile of domestic violence” (Home Office 1999). To assist they gave the following definition of what constitutes domestic violence.

“The term ‘domestic violence’ shall be understood to mean any violence between current or former partners in an intimate relationship, wherever and whenever it occurs. The violence may include physical, sexual, emotional or financial abuse” (Home Office 1999).

This change in attitude reflects a move from a utilitarian approach towards a more principled approach to policing domestic violence.

Modern day domestic policing

In June 1987, the Metropolitan Police introduced a new policy towards cases of domestic violence which emphasised the use of arrest, enhanced support for the victim, improved training for the police and improved record keeping in line with and possibly in anticipation of the 1999 definition (above).

Hoyle (1998) found that far from being reluctant to arrest, police were frustrated by the victims reluctance to support positive court action against their assailants. Hoyle went as far as to say,

‘Domestic violence is now in theory recognised as ‘real crime’.

As opposed to a previous view identified by Reiner (2000) who quotes Sir Kenneth Newman (former Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police),

“messy, unproductive, and not ‘real’ police work in traditional cop culture” (p.135)

Hoyle found that far from the common feminist view that low arrest rates were as a result of canteen culture of the uncaring police service. The police officers frequently dealt with incidents in ways that showed compassion for the victim. She found they were sometimes willing to ‘bend’ and stretch the letter of the law to offer some respite to an abused woman. Hoyle found officers frustrated when the victims were reluctant to support their action. Hoyle also found that there was no detectable difference in the way male or female officers dealt with the issues.

What explained low arrest rates, Hoyle argues was that victims genuinely did want to pursue a prosecution. Feminists argue that the unwillingness identified by Hoyle is a myth and disagree with her view that research shows that victims genuinely did not want officers to arrest their abusive partner

Hoyle found in her research that female justification for refusing to testify at court was summarised as only wanting him out of house for a short time to calm down. A concern of victims was if he gets arrested what will happen to the family income. What about the mortgage and other bills. It is a fact that many men are still the main wage earner in a family and should the wages be lost what will happen to the family home etc.

An example of this is expressed by concerns that question the appropriateness and effectiveness of a positive arrest policy in domestic violence incidents. In particular, it is questioned as to whether arresting assailants actually reduces the violence that the victim faces. Levi (1997) points to evidence to suggest that far from reducing the violence, arrests can lead to an increase in the rate of recidivism amongst certain social groupings. Waddington (1999a) supports this with reference to Hoyle (1998) who argues that women tend to want nothing more than an immediate break from the violence and give a warning to their partners. Consequently, Hoyle (1998) suggests that making arrests could stop women from calling the police because they feel that the action they take goes too far.

Recognising signs of domestic violence.

The police traditionally deal with what they are called to or are informed of. Domestic Violence units have been developed over a number of years and now have a number of support mechanisms in place ready to be actioned when needed. If police are to become more proactive in reducing domestic violence they need to understand the vulnerable groups. Waddington (1999) identifies those vulnerable groups. The British Crime Survey (BCS) shows that domestic violence is concentrated among the young and those who suffer the usual depressing catalogue of deprivation and disorganisation. Thus those most at risk are the divorced, separated, unemployed, lower social classes, living in rented or council accommodation who are experiencing financial hardship and suffering poor health, and who consume excessive quantities of alcohol and use drugs.

Other methods such as attempting to identify victims through their groupings as demonstrated by the BCS (above) with some further help from Saunders (cited in Campbell 1995) who suggests 9 risk factors which are associated with wife assault summarised in the table below.

Degree of Risk

Risk Factor
Any Assault
Severe Assault
Comments
Violence in the family of origin
a
a
More risk if man both saw abuse and was abused
Low education and income of man
a

More risk if woman of higher status
Alcohol
a
a
Chronic abuse may be key factor
Behavioural deficits
b

Especially if combined with need for power
Personality disorders
b

wide variety of patterns and disorders
Child abuse
b
c
Half of violent husbands severely abuse a child
Anger
b

Especially for marital situations
Stress
c

‘Stressor’ may be the result of violence
Depression
c

Low self-esteem may be better risk marker
Generalised aggression

a
Violent both inside and outside the home
Antisocial traits

c
Criminal lifestyle and no remorse for violence
Key: a = prominent risk, b = probable risk, c = possible risk

The Police are not always in the best position to identify the early signs of Domestic Violence. Kent Police have recognised the need for reaching out beyond the service and giving advice to others who may see earlier signs such as work colleagues or work supervisors. A series of conferences have been announced, aimed primarily at employers giving advice on signs of domestic violence. It is thought that the workplace is an arena where victims may discuss DV. It is intended as an opportunity to raise awareness as to the signs of DV.

Challenges for the future

The overriding influence of Home Office Circular 60/90 is noted by Plotnikoff and Woolfson (1999) by the fact that 95% of forces “specifically mentioned the need for positive action and the presumption of arrest” (p.5).

If Hoyle’s (1998) view is correct and the relatively low arrest rates for DV is due to victims reluctance to have their partners arrested and prosecuted then processes to change that view should be considered. Support functions need to be put in place for the victim .

Zedner (2002) notes the influence of the women’s movement, which emerged in the late 1960s and 1970s, and in particular the establishment of the Women’s Refuge Movement, upon the policing of domestic violence. Erin Pizzey’s campaigning resulted in the establishment of the first Refuge for ‘battered women’ in Chiswick, London in 1972. Zedner (2002) notes that 30 years on there are ‘250 projects running 400 safe houses’ throughout the United Kingdom (p.434). Pizzey’s refuges are seen by Mawby (1999) to be atypical in that they represented a good working relationship with the police. This, he argues, was unusual in the UK, where radical feminists dominated the scene and adopted an anti-police approach to their campaigns about the problems of domestic violence, unlike in the USA, where the women’s movement played a more central role alongside the police.

There is also some suggestion of linking domestic violence work with that of child protection. NCH Action for Children (1997) argue that:

“Where there is knowledge of child abuse it is vital to consider the possibility of domestic violence and vice versa” (p.34).

However, Grace (1995) and Plotnikoff and Woolfson (1999) note that there advantages and disadvantages of linking child protection and domestic violence within the organisation and structure of police work. The advantages relate to shared information, data and intelligence. The main disadvantage is that domestic violence can become subsumed within the child protection priorities and given less attention than it deserves. A further disadvantage of linking domestic violence investigations with potential child abuse child abuse investigations is that it may be considered by victims to be another case of the police taking more action than is necessary. As Hoyle states they may want their partner removed for a short time but do they want the family investigated in a child protection arena? Probably not. However with definitions of child cruelty including ‘emotional harm or neglect’ it is natural for the police to consider this in any thorough investigation.

Conclusion

This is a real dilemma in the policing of domestic violence, between concerns for the victim and a desire to arrest the offender. It is important to remember that the logic behind a positive arrest policy was initially based upon the interests of the victim. However it is important also to consider the views of the victim. What is the history of the offender? Is the incident leading to the arrest the peak of the behaviour and reporting to the police the start of reconciliation that would be eliminated by a charge and conviction?

It could be argued that the driving force behind domestic violence policies has become societal, rather than victim, concerns (i.e. D.V. is unacceptable in itself, not because of its victims).

Whatever the decision, in any case, what is certain is that a support mechanism needs to be in place to prevent recurrence of the violence to enable victims and their families to live safely.

David Withers

March 2003