http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/07/opinion/07iyengar.html?_r=1&th&emc=th&oref=slo\
gin
The Protection Battered Spouses Don't Need

By RADHA IYENGAR
Published: August 7, 2007
Cambridge, Mass.

TWO decades ago, in an effort to curb domestic violence, states began
passing "mandatory arrest" laws. Police officers responding to a call
for help would no longer need to determine whether one person was
truly violent or out of control; every time someone reported abuse,
the police would simply be required to make an arrest.

It seemed like a good tactic — at least to people who work with
victims of domestic violence. (Police officers tended to be less
enthusiastic, because they prefer to make arrests at their own
discretion.) Arrests would immediately stop the violence and might
discourage abusers from further acts of abuse.

But 20 years later, it seems the mandatory arrest laws are having an
unintended, deadly side effect. The number of murders committed by
intimate partners is now significantly higher in states with
mandatory arrest laws than it is in other states.

Support for the laws began in 1984, after a federal district court in
Connecticut ruled that the police had inadequately protected a woman
whose husband had brutally assaulted her. State lawmakers decided
they needed more control over how local police departments enforced
restraining orders against abusers and intervened in incidents of
violence. One way to get that control was to dictate how the police
should respond in each case.

A small but influential study of police responses to domestic
violence calls, conducted by criminologists in Minnesota in the early
1980s, found that arrests were the most effective strategy for
reducing future violence. Now, 22 states and the District of Columbia
have laws that mandate or at least strongly recommend that everyone
accused of domestic abuse be arrested.

What the laws did not take into account was that eventually the
victims of violence would come to realize that if they called the
police, their abuser would certainly be arrested. And over the years,
it turns out, that realization seems to have led victims to contact
the police less.

I recently conducted my own study of mandatory arrest laws by
comparing the rates of murders by intimate partners before and after
the laws went into effect. Intimate partner homicides have generally
decreased in the past 20 years, perhaps because greater awareness of
the problem of domestic violence has led to the creation of more
resources for victims. But in states with mandatory arrest laws, the
homicides are about 50 percent higher today than they are in states
without the laws.

The mandatory arrest laws were intended to impose a cost on abusers.
But because of psychological, emotional and financial ties that often
keep victims loyal to their abusers, the cost of arrest is easily
transferred from abusers to victims. Victims want protection, but
they do not always want to see their partners put behind bars.

In some cases, victims may favor an arrest, but fear that their
abusers will be quickly released. And many victims may avoid calling
the police for fear that they, too, will be arrested for physically
defending themselves. The possibility of such "dual arrests" is most
worrisome for victims who have children at home.

The situation is different in incidents in which abuse is suffered by
people who are not intimate partners — children, for example. The
certainty of arrest does nothing to deter the reporting of such
cases, usually by teachers, doctors or other third parties. In fact,
my research shows that in states with mandatory arrest laws there are
fewer murders of non-intimate-partner family members than there are
in states without the laws.

Despite two decades of increased public awareness, domestic violence
remains a serious problem. Arresting abusers is often desirable, as
are efforts to educate the police about domestic violence and
effective intervention and to provide treatment and support for
victims. But it makes no sense to keep following a strategy that
discourages victims from reporting abuse.

Radha Iyengar is a fellow in health policy research at Harvard.
=============================================================




[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]