Content area
Full Text
This study examines court records of 244 defendants assigned to court-connected treatment to determine whether "defendant-initiated diversion" offenders recidivated less than defendants who were mandated by the court to undergo treatment. The study population consisted of 140 defendants who voluntarily opted to participate in a domestic violence (DV) court diversion program and 104 convicted offenders who were ordered by the court to complete treatment as part of their sentence of probation. Defendants who had prior felony or DV convictions were not accepted into the diversion program. A logit model analysis revealed a statistically significant negative relationship between diversion completion and DV recidivism during the 24 months after treatment completion or case closure. These results illustrate trate the importance of including defendant-initiated diversion for low risk offenders as part of a court system strategy to address DV.
KEYWORDS: re-offense; batterer treatment; recidivism; stages of change
Domestic violence (DV) is a major social problem. In 2005, the annual cost of domestic crime was estimated at approximately $67 billion, accounting for almost 15% of the total national crime costs (Feder & Wilson, 2005). In 1996, women reported intimate violence 840,000 times (Babcock, Green, & Robie, 2004). More recently, the number of such incidents reportedly reached more than 1.5 million annually (Kindness et al., 2009). Physical aggression occurs in at least 20% of all dating relationships (Slashinski, Coker, & Davis, 2003). An estimated 8.7 million women are victimized each year by a current or former intimate partner (Day, Chung, O'Leary, & Carson, 2009). It is not uncommon for victims to experience repeated episodes of abuse. Research reveals that many targets of DV are at greater risk of future violations (Feder & Wilson).
Over the past four decades, the American legal system has recognized the need to address DV. Beginning in the late 1970s, prosecution of DV increased and prevention programs expanded. These interventions were intended to promote victim safety and to hold the perpetrator accountable (Austin & Dankwort, 1999). Many courts began ordering defendants to undergo DV treatment. Typically, judges ordered convicted offenders to complete treatment as part of their sentence. Treatment typically consists of attending 8-52 weekly small group sessions conducted by a professional. In most cases, the judge monitors the defendant until treatment is completed. Even...