Domestic violence fatality reviews: From a culture of blame to a culture of safety
Domestic violence fatality reviews: From a culture of blame to a culture of safety
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/j.1755-6988.1999.tb00800.x
复制
发表时间：
1999-03-01
影响因子：
0.4
通讯作者：
Johnson, B
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Websdale, N;Town, M;Johnson, B
随着法院和社区试图对抗家庭暴力，如何处理家庭暴力死亡的问题不断出现。通常，这些死亡事件由刑事司法系统处理，该系统调查死亡事件，并酌情查明和起诉肇事者。然而，这种刑事司法处理方式对审查负责服务和保护那些易受家庭暴力和死亡伤害的人的各种制度的有效性几乎没有帮助。鉴于大多数社区都经历过引人注目的家庭暴力杀人事件，这一缺陷就更加严重。传统上，这些悲剧会导致相互指责、愤怒、恐惧、沮丧和不信任。有时，这种指责以社论、诉讼和立法听证会的形式出现。这些形式的指责，有时在航空和核能等领域被称为”墓碑技术”，并没有产生效果。1它们可能导致对拖延和掩盖的指控。因此，许多社区成员，包括法官、法院行政人员、民选官员、检察官、执法官员和受虐待妇女的倡导者，正在寻找可行和公平的模式来审查家庭暴力死亡案件，以防止今后的死亡。这种探索不是为胆小的人准备的，因为它需要从责备文化向安全文化的范式转变，在这种文化中，通过预防性问责的透镜来审查家庭暴力死亡。幸运的是，在医学和航空领域有可行的模型可供借鉴。这些模式教导法院和社区，有活力，诚实和坦率，他们可以建立可靠的制度，重视问责制，并有助于防止未来的死亡和伤害的家庭暴力。由于家庭暴力死亡具有可预测的模式和病因，因此是可以预防的。我们认为，建立家庭暴力死亡审查小组是减少家庭暴力杀人的有效途径之一。在简要概述了家庭暴力相关死亡的范围和程度后，本文讨论了家庭暴力死亡审查的历史，并提出了几种似乎既有效又公平的模式。我们特别强调，这些模式是一个需要数年时间才能展开的新兴进程的一部分。我们特别建议在促进和建立地方审查程序方面发挥司法领导作用。在有统一的家庭法院或密切协调的少年/家庭法院的司法管辖区，情况尤其如此。我们无意提出进行这种审查的模式。相反，这篇文章提出了各种显然有效的模式，因为作者相信社区将以自己独特的方式审查”家庭暴力死亡”。通过提出关键问题和提出可行的
As courts and communities try to confront domestic violence, the question of what to do about domestic violence fatalities continually resurfaces. Normally, these fatalities are handled by the criminal justice system, which investigates the deaths and identifies and charges the perpetrators, when appropriate. Such criminal justice handling, however, does little to review the effectiveness of the various systems charged with serving and protecting those vulnerable to domestic violence and death. This shortcoming is all the more significant given that most communities have experienced a high profile domestic violence homicide. Traditionally, these tragedies have resulted in finger pointing, anger, fear, frustration, and distrust. Sometimes, this finger pointing has found voice in the form of editorials, lawsuits, and legislative hearings. These forms of finger pointing, sometimes referred to as" tombstone technology" in fields such as aviation and nuclear power, have not been productive. 1 They can result in accusations of stonewalling and cover-ups. Consequently, many community members, including judges, court administrators, elected officials, prosecutors, law enforcement officials, and battered women's advocates are looking for workable and fair models to review domestic violence fatalities, with a view to preventing future deaths. This search is not for the fainthearted since it requires a paradigm shift from a culture of blame to a culture of safety in which domestic violence deaths are reviewed through the lens of preventive accountability. Fortunately, there are workable models in the fields of medicine and aviation upon which to draw. These models teach courts and communities that, with vigor, honesty, and candor, they can build reliable systems that value accountability and help prevent future death and injury from domestic violence. Because domestic violence deaths exhibit predictable patterns and etiologies, they are preventable. We argue that the establishment of domestic violence fatality review teams is one effective way of reducing domestic violence homicides. After briefly outlining the scope and extent of domestic violence related deaths, this article discusses the history of domestic violence fatality reviews and presents several models that appear to be both effective and fair. In particular, we emphasize that these models form part of an emerging process that will take years to unfold. We especially recommend judicial leadership in promoting and establishing local review processes. This is particularly so in jurisdictions where a unified family court or closely coordinated juvenñe/family court exists. It is not our intent to present a formula for conducting such reviews. Rather, this article presents a variety of apparently effective models, since the authors believe communities will review" domestic violence deaths" in their own unique ways. By raising key questions and presenting workable