Domestic Violence

X. Conclusion

The purpose of this research paper was to review the topic of domestic violence from a criminology and criminal justice perspective. Domestic violence is the attempt by one person to obtain power and control over his or her intimate partner through psychological, physical, or sexual abuse. Victims of domestic violence are familiar with what is called the “cycle of violence,” which consists of three stages that victims of domestic violence continually cycle through at the hands of their batterers.

Although there is no specific way to identify a batterer before the abuse starts, the following are some common red flags to be aware of in a relationship: extreme jealousy or possessiveness, the need for control, rigid stereotypical views on gender roles, isolation from friends and family, economic control, extreme insecurity regarding the self or the relationship, and constantly checking up on or questioning the other’s whereabouts. Similarly, there is no way to identify a victim prior to the person’s victimization because this form of violence is pervasive in all cultures, faiths, educational levels, income levels, and sexual orientations. The domestic violence movement, with the help of the women’s movement, has made many strides toward improving the criminal justice system’s response to the crime of domestic violence. For example, although somewhat controversial, the passage of mandatory arrest laws have shown society that law enforcement officers are committed to holding offenders accountable for their actions. The development of domestic violence courts has indicated that the judicial system views domestic violence differently from other crimes and that it therefore needs its own system of offender processing. Despite the many ways in which the criminal justice system has evolved in its response to domestic violence in the past 40 years (Parnas, 1967), there is still much more work to do in the fight against domestic violence.

Browse domestic violence research topics and other criminal justice research topics.


  1. Alabama Coalition of Domestic Violence. (2013). Dating violence. Retrieved August 21, 2013, from
  2. Arriaga, X. A. B., & Foshee, V. A. (2004). Adolescent dating violence: Do adolescents follow in their friends’ or their parents’ footsteps? Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 19, 162–184.
  3. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2005). Family violence statistics. Washington, DC: Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.
  4. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2006). Intimate partner violence in the United States. Washington, DC: Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice.
  5. Chesney-Lind, M. (2002). Criminalizing victimization: The unintended consequences of pro-arrest policies for girls and women. Criminology and Public Policy, 2, 81–90.
  6. Coker, D. (2000). Crime control and feminist law reform in domestic violence law: A critical review. Buffalo Criminal Law Review, 4, 801–860.
  7. Fagan, J. (1996). The criminalization of domestic violence: Promises and limits. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice Report.
  8. Fountain, K., & Skolnik, A. A. (2006). Lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender domestic violence in the United States in 2006. New York: National Coalition of Anti-Violence Programs (NCAVP).
  9. Gover, A. R., Brank, E. M., & MacDonald, J. M. (2007). A specialized domestic violence court in South Carolina: An example of procedural justice for victims and defendants. Violence Against Women, 13, 603–626.
  10. Gover, A. R., Kaukinen, C., & Fox, K. A. (2008). The relationship between violence in the family of origin and dating violence among college students. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 23(12), 1667–1693.
  11. Gover, A. R., MacDonald, J. M., & Alpert, G. A. (2003). Combating domestic violence in rural America: Findings from an evaluation of a local domestic violence court. Criminology and Public Policy, 3, 109–132.
  12. Henning, K., & Feder, L. (2005). Criminal prosecution of domestic violence offenses: An investigation of factors predictive of court outcomes. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 32, 612– 642.
  13. Maxwell, C. D., Garner, J. H., & Fagan, J. A. (2001). The effects of arrest on intimate partner violence: New evidence from the Spouse Assault Replication Program (NCJ 188199). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, National Institute of Justice.
  14. Mazur, R., & Aldrich, L. (2003). What makes domestic violence court work? Lessons from NewYork. Judges Journal, 42, 2.
  15. Miller, N. (2004). Domestic violence: A review of state legislation defining police and prosecution duties and powers. Alexandria, VA: Institute for Law and Justice.
  16. Miller, S. (1989). Unintended side effects of pro-arrest policies and their race and class implications for battered women: A cautionary note. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 3, 299–316.
  17. National Center for Victims of Crime. (2013). Stalking. Retrieved August 21, 2013, from
  18. National Coalition Against Domestic Violence. (2008). Domestic violence and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender relationships. Retrieved February 1, 2008, from
  19. National Network to End Domestic Violence. (2007). Domestic Violence Counts: 07. A 24-hour census of domestic violence shelters and services across the United States. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved August 21 2013, from
  20. Parmley, A. M. (2004). Violence against women research post VAWA. Violence Against Women, 10, 1417–1430.
  21. Parnas, R. I. (1967). The police response to the domestic disturbance. Wisconsin Law Review, 2, 914–960.
  22. Renzetti, C. M. (1992). Violent betrayal: Partner abuse in lesbian relationships. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  23. Roscoe, B., & Kelsey, T. (1986). Dating violence among high school students. Psychology, 23, 53–57.
  24. Sherman, L. W., Berk, R. A. (1984). The specific deterrent effects of arrest for domestic assault. American Sociological Review, 49, 261–272.
  25. Smith, A. (2000). It’s my decision, isn’t it? A research note on battered women’s perceptions of mandatory intervention laws. Violence Against Women, 6, 1384–1402.
  26. Stets, J. E., & Straus, M. A. (1990). Gender differences in reporting marital violence and its medial and psychological consequences. In M. A. Straus & R. J. Gelles (Eds.), Physical violence in American families: Risk factors and adaptations to violence in 8,145 families (pp. 151–166). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.
  27. Straus, M. A. (1999). The controversy over domestic violence by women: A methodological, theoretical, and sociology of science analysis. In X. Arriaga & S. Oskamp (Eds.), Violence in intimate relationships (pp. 17–44). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  28. Tjaden P., & Thoennes, N. (2000). Full report of the prevalence, incidence, and consequences of violence against women: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey (NCJ 183781). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
  29. Tsai, B. (2000). The trend toward specialized domestic violence courts: Improvements on an effective innovation. Fordham Law Review, 1285–1327.
  30. U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics. (2001). Special report: Intimate partner violence and age of victim, 1993–1999. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
  31. Winick, B. J. (1997). The jurisprudence of therapeutic jurisprudence. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 184–206.