Domestic Violence: A Brief Critique of Impact

The following sample essay is about domestic violence. To read the introduction, body, and conclusion of the essay, scroll down.

Domestic Violence:

A BRIEF CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF IMPACT AND INTERVENTIONS

BUILT ON A DEFINITIONAL, HISTORICAL, AND THEORETICAL FOUNDATION

“And yet I fear you, for you ‘re fatal so

When your eyes roll so.

Why I should fear I know non,

Since guiltiness I know non, but yet I feel I fear.”

Introduction

The introductory citation by Desdemona expresses her fright of Othello’s fury ( Shakespeare, 1604, cited in Meyersfeld, 2003 ) at the same clip articulately conveying the panic implicit in domestic force and showing that domestic force is non a new phenomenon.

Neither is domestic force a rare happening. Harmonizing to the British authorities, domestic force affects 1000000s of lives. The undermentioned statistics are quoted from the official authorities web site ( CrimeReduction.gov.uk,Domestic force mini-site, 2005 ) :

• one in four adult females and one in six work forces will be victims of domestic force in their life-time with adult females at greater hazard of repetition exploitation and serious hurt ;

• 89 per centum of those enduring four or more incidents are adult females ;

• one incident of domestic force is reported to the constabulary every minute ;

• on mean, two adult females a hebdomad are killed by a current or former male spouse ; and

• domestic force histories for 16 per centum of all violent offense.

This essay will show that the issue of domestic force is a complex one, much more complex than the term itself might convey.

Get quality help now

Writer Lyla

Verified

Proficient in: Abuse

5 (876)

“ Have been using her for a while and please believe when I tell you, she never fail. Thanks Writer Lyla you are indeed awesome ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

Indeed, domestic force is complex in footings of its very definition, complex in footings of its theoretical accounts, complex in footings of gender relevancy, complex in footings of its effects, and complex in footings of intercessions to forestall and cover with its happening. The essay begins with a presentation and review of assorted definitions for domestic force, an geographic expedition of the historical development of domestic force as a social concern, and a treatment and review of theoretical accounts for domestic force including consideration of the relevancy of gender. This foundation will be used as a footing for researching the impact of domestic force upon its direct and indirect victims and the value and efficaciousness of the current resources, enterprises, and support webs used in battling domestic force and helping its victims. Finally, reasoning comments will be presented.

A Critique on Definitions of Domestic Violence

Finding a generally-accepted definition fordomestic forceproved to be an elusive enterprise. This may be because there is no consensus definition of the term ( Laurence and Spalter-Roth, 1996 ;Contemporary Women ‘s Issues Database, May 1996 ;Contemporary Women ‘s Issues Database, July 1996 ) . Each author seems to specify the term to suit his or her subject or docket. For case, Chez ( 1994, cited in Gibson-Howell, 1996 ) , in concentrating on female victims of domestic force, defines the term as “the repeated subjugation of a adult female to forceful physical, societal, and psychological behaviour to hale her without respect to her rights.” Some definitions are basic and general: “a form of regularly happening maltreatment and force, or the menace of force, in an confidant ( though non needfully cohabitating ) relationship” ( Gibson-Howell, 1996, mentioning Loring and Smith, 1994 ) . Other definitions are comprehensive and specific ( Manor, 1996 ; Neufield, 1996 ;Asiatic Pages, 1998 ; Josiah, 1998 ;Seattle Post-Intelligencer, 1999 ; Danis, 2003;Verkaik, 2003 ) . The more comprehensive definitions, although phrased otherwise, typically possess the undermentioned common elements:

• a form of opprobrious behaviour ( as contrasted to a individual event ) ;

• the opprobrious behaviour involves control, coercion, and/or power ;

• the opprobrious behaviour may be physical, sexual, emotional, psychological, and/or fiscal ; and

• the victim of the opprobrious behaviour is a cohabitating or non-cohabitating intimate spouse or partner.

The British authorities has adopted one of the more expansive descriptions of domestic force, one that includes all of the foregoing elements: “Any incident of endangering behavior, force or maltreatment ( psychological, physical, sexual, fiscal or emotional ) between grownups who are or have been intimate spouses or household members, irrespective of gender or gender. ” Beyond the basic definition, the authorities furnishes farther description of domestic force as “a form of opprobrious and commanding behaviour” by which the maltreater efforts to derive power over the victim. The authorities contends that domestic force crosses age, gender, racial, gender, wealth, and geographical lines. ( CrimeReduction.gov.uk,Domestic force mini-site, 2005 ) Interestingly, the definition offered by the authorities expands the description to include other “family members” in add-on to “intimate partners.”

Historical Development of the Recognition of Domestic Violence as a Social Concern

The issue of domestic force, peculiarly force against female partners, was a subject of social concern dating from the first matrimony jurisprudence instituted by Romulus in 75 B.C. But the concern was non inforestallingdomestic force ; to the reverse ; the concern was in support of “wife beating”—legally and institutionally—a status that existed through the early 20th century. ( Danis, 2003, mentioning Dobash and Dobash, 1979 ) . English common jurisprudence, until the late 19th century, “structured matrimony to give a hubby high quality over his married woman in most facets of the relationship.” This “sanctioned superiority” gave the hubby the right to “command his wife’s obeisance, and capable her to bodily penalty or ‘chastisement’ if she defied his authority.” ( Tuerkheimer, 2004, mentioning Siegel, 1996 ) The beginning of the 20th century witnessed the dismantlement of Torahs specifically excusing control and force ; nevertheless, the Torahs were non replaced by codifications that protected victims from maltreatment. Alternatively, “marital privacy” became the criterion. Basically, maltreatment was considered to be a household job, non one in which society had an involvement. ( Turekheimer, 2004 )

Not until the feminist motion of the late sixtiess and 1970s was public involvement in domestic force piqued ( Danis, 2003, mentioning Schechter, 1982 ) . With small public or private support, feminist militants set up shelters for female victims of domestic force. They besides pressed for Torahs to penalize wrongdoers and promoted preparation of societal workers and other professions to acknowledge domestic force and handle its victims. (Contemporary Women’s Issues Database, May 1996 ) . From these low beginnings, over the last thirty-plus old ages, public consciousness has been enhanced dramatically, increasing sums of public and private support have been allocated for shelters, domestic force Torahs have been strengthened, and societal workers and other professionals ( e.g. school forces, health care professionals, constabulary officers ) have been trained to acknowledge marks of, and supply intervention to those affected by, domestic force.

Today, in the early old ages of the new millenary, the manner in which society positions domestic force is go oning to germinate. Physical maltreatment of married womans was the initial focal point of intercession enterprises. Pulling on research presented earlier, sexual, emotional, psychological, and fiscal maltreatment have been added to physical maltreatment as types of domestic force. And, many definitions of victims of domestic force now include, in add-on to married womans, hubbies and domestic spouses of the same or different sex. Increasingly, excessively, kids in the domestic agreement are being included as victims of domestic force.

Theoretical Explanations for Domestic Violence and the Relevance of Gender

Merely as there is a deficiency of consensus on a individual definition for domestic force, “there is no individual recognized causal theory for domestic violence.” In the absence of a individual theory, at least four theories are used to explicate why domestic force occurs: societal exchange/deterrence, societal acquisition, women’s rightist, and the ecological model. ( Danis, 2003 ) These theories, with their relevancy to domestic force, will be presented and critiqued in this subdivision. A treatment of the relevancy of gender in domestic force will shut out the subdivision.

Under thesocietal exchange theory, human interaction is driven by prosecuting wagess and avoiding penalties and costs. ( Danis, 2003, mentioning Blau, 1964 ) . Gelles and Cornell ( 1985, 1990, cited in Danis, 2003 ) contend that domestic force occurs when costs do non outweigh wagess. Costss in this context include the possible for defensive physical action by the victim, potency of being arrested and imprisoned, loss of personal position, and disintegration of the domestic agreement.

Thesocietal acquisition theorysuggests that people learn to be violent by being instantly rewarded or punished after they commit violent behaviour, through what is calledsupport, and by watching the experiences of others, calledpatterning( Danis, 2003, mentioning Bandura, 1973 ) . Harmonizing to some experts, there is a correlativity between people who witness opprobrious behaviour in their earlier lives and those who commit domestic force subsequently. ( Danis, 2003, mentioning O’Leary, 1987 ) .

Harmonizing towomen’s rightist theory, domestic force emanates from a “patriarchal” school system which assigns work forces the duty for commanding and pull offing female spouses ( Danis, 2003, mentioning Dobash and Dobash, 1979 ; Yllo, 1993 ) . Under this theory, domestic force is attributed to a defect in social construction instead than to any specific single male pathology.

Finally, theecological model theory, in postulating that no individual theory can be used in explicating or foretelling domestic force, proposes hazard factors for domestic force and intercessions to turn to it at three levels—the micro degree ( e.g. batterer plans ) , the meso degree ( e.g. constabulary and the tribunals ) , and the macro degree ( e.g. a co-ordinated community attack ) . ( Danis, 2003, mentioning Crowell and Burgess, 1996 ; Chalk and King, 1998 ) .

Each of these four theories offers valuable penetration into domestic force. For case, the societal exchange theory offers a footing for jurisprudence enforcement and prosecution of wrongdoers ; the societal acquisition theory helps to explicate why kids who witness abuse sometimes turn up to be maltreaters themselves thereby supplying principle for disciplinary intercessions to “unlearn” opprobrious behaviour ; and the women’s rightist theory supports intercessions targeted at assisting batterers to reform and assisting to authorise victims. But none of these theories seems to supply a comprehensive foundation on which a comprehensive attack for covering with the many causal and outcome dimensions of domestic force can be built. The more incorporate ecological model theory, nevertheless, seems to supply the needful footing for such a comprehensive attack.

Now attending will turn to the subject of the relevancy of gender in domestic force. Historically, as mentioned earlier, married womans were considered to be the lone victims of domestic force. Today, husbands every bit good as same- or different-sex non-married spouses are considered to be victims as good ( Cruz, 2003 ) . Although the statistics vary significantly ( Leo, 1994 ) , some indicating that the same figure of work forces as adult females are victims of domestic force ( Leo, 1994 ; Simerman, 2002 ) , most experts agree than adult females are most frequently the victims and, when they are victimized, the harm is normally more serious. The indicant that adult females are most frequently victims has now gained official acknowledgment. The British authorities contends that, although domestic force is non restricted to a specific gender, “it consists chiefly of force by work forces against women.” ( CrimeReduction.gov.uk,Domestic force mini-site, 2005 )

The Potential Impact of Domestic Violence on Females, Mothers, and Children

Harmonizing to theContemporary Women’s Issues Database( January 1996 ) , “the most common victims ( of domestic force ) are adult females and children.” With the recognition that domestic force affects work forces every bit good as adult females, the focal point of the treatment in this subdivision will be on the possible impact of domestic force on females, by and large, and on females in their function as female parents every bit good as on their kids.

Domestic force against adult females can ensue in serious physical hurts, psychological injury, and mental strain ( Wha-soon, 1994 ) . Harmonizing to Wha-soon, physical hurts include “severe concerns, contusions, bone breaks, loss of eyesight, nervous palsy, insomnia and dyspepsia, ” and psychological injury can include “anxiety, a sense of impotence, and a loss of self-respect and self-confidence.” Psychological effects can take to suicide in some instances. Winkvist ( 2001 ) echoes these psychological effects and adds that battered adult females are besides more likely to see sexual and generative wellness upsets. Effectss are non restricted to those that are physical and psychological in nature, nevertheless. Womans can be financially impacted every bit good. Brown and Kenneym ( 1996 ) contend that adult females, in an attempt to fly their aggressors, may “give up fiscal security and their homes” in favour of safety.

Mothers may see extra negative effects from domestic force. Starr ( 2001 ) contends that domestic force against female parents “is associated with harmful deductions for mental wellness and parenting, every bit good as for the offspring.” Harmonizing to Starr, female parents who are in an environment of domestic force suffer worse results for themselves and for their kids. Isaac ( 1997 ) suggests that maltreatment of female parents and kids are linked, saying that from 30 to about sixty per centum of female parents reported for kid maltreatment were themselves abused.

Hewitt ( 2002 ) claims that 90 per centum of happenings of domestic force are witnessed either straight or indirectly by kids. Children can be affected in at least two ways by domestic force. Harmonizing to the British authorities, they can be traumatized by force they witness against others in the relationship even when they are non the specific marks of the force ( CrimeReduction.gov.uk,Domestic force mini-site, 2005 ) . Harmonizing to Hewitt ( 2002 ) , kids suffer low self-pride, isolation, injury, and homelessness that they may non attest until subsequently in life. They may besides endure from maladies such as concern, unhappiness, focal point and concentration troubles, forgetfulness, concerns and stomach aches, lying, and “poor impulse control, ” harmonizing to Salisbury and Wichmann ( 2004 ) .

Importantly, there is besides a strong correlativity between domestic force and kid maltreatment, a point which reinforces Isaac’s place mentioned earlier ( CrimeReduction.gov.uk,Domestic force mini-site, 2005 ) . Edleson ( 1999, cited in Spath, 2003 ) takes the same place in saying that “numerous research surveies over the last several decennaries have reported a connexion between domestic force and kid ill-treatment within families.” And, eventually, as mentioned earlier, the societal acquisition theory would propose that kids who witness force learn that force is an acceptable manner to settle differences. Supporting this, Wha-soon ( 1994 ) writes that the “learning of force causes a rhythm of violence.”

An Appraisal of the Value and Efficacy of Domestic Violence Interventions

Methods for covering with domestic force by and large fall into three classs: bar, protection, and justness (M2 Presswire, 1998 ) . As the footings imply,barefforts to debar incidences of domestic force through methods such as instruction and guidance ;protectioninvolves efforts to forestall farther hurt through methods such as taking victims from the state of affairs and telling wrongdoers to remain off from their victims ; andjustnessinvolves requital against domestic force wrongdoers.

The value and efficaciousness of bar, protection, and justness methods used in covering with domestic force are hard to mensurate. A ground for this was mentioned earlier: the deficiency of a consensus definition for domestic force itself. (Contemporary Women’s Issues Database,May 1996 ) . However, there has been some effort at mensurating public presentation anecdotally. Harmonizing to the Contemporary Women’s Issues Database ( April 1993 ) : “Currently, the two most common signifiers of societal intercession are mechanisms that help her to go forth ( such as exigency shelters ) and holding him arrested… ( but ) neither of these intercessions is ideal.” And, constabularies and judicial intercessions do non look to fair much better as illustrated by the instance of Samuel Gutierrez who killed his domestic spouse, Kelly Gonzalez, in Chicago, Illinois in the United States after multiple whippings, apprehensions, and assorted tribunal intercessions ( Hanna, 1998 ) .

That domestic force still exists as such a serious societal job is likely the best grounds that current methods for forestalling it, protecting its victims, and demanding justness on wrongdoers are non working particularly good. Possibly the hereafter will be brighter. Newer positions, such as that offered by the ecological model theory, offer some hope. It seems that taking a comprehensive, incorporate attack could potentially be well more effectual as the assorted public and private constituents work together in a co-op, interactive agreement with one goal—the public assistance of the possible or existent victim. One expert even suggests that this combined public-private attack could be enhanced farther by adding a 3rd component—the household ( atomic household, extended household, intimate household, near relationships ) —to the formal, incorporate support agreement ( Kelly, 2004 ) .

Decision

Public and private organisations continue to increase their attending to domestic force. In the United Kindgom,The Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004furnishes greater authorization to patrol and the tribunals in covering with instances of domestic force and in supplying protection to victims. Aditionally, the British government’s late issued national domestic force action program sets away ambitious ends ( CrimeReduction.gov.uk,Domestic Violence, 2005 ) quoted as follows:

• cut down the prevalence of domestic force ;
• increase the rate that domestic force is reported ;
• increase the rate of domestic force offenses that are brought to justness ;
• guarantee victims of domestic force are adequately protected and supported countrywide ; and
• cut down the figure of domestic force related homicides.

Returning to the introductory citation, had Shakespeare’s Desdemona been alive today, possibly she would hold some hope that she would non everlastingly be in such great fright of Othello’s fury.

Mentions

1. Asiatic Pages( 1998 ) What is domestic force? November 14, 1998.
2. Bandura, A. ( 1973 ) .Aggression: A societal acquisition analysis. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Cited in Danis, Fran S. ( 2003 ) The criminalisation of domestic force: What societal workers need to cognize.Social Work, April 1, 2003.
3. Blau, P. M. ( 1964 ) .Exchange and power in societal life. New York: John Wiley & A ; Sons. Danis, Fran S. ( 2003 ) The criminalisation of domestic force: What societal workers need to cognize.Social Work, April 1, 2003.
4. Brown, Karen R. and Kenneym, Catherine T. ( 1996 ) Report from the front lines: The impact of force on hapless adult females [ Part 1 of 5 ] .Contemporary Women ‘s Issues Database, January 1, 1996.
5. Chalk, R. , & A ; King, A. ( 1998 ) . ( Eds. ) .Violence in households: Assessing bar and intervention plans. Washington, DC: National Research Council/National Academy of Sciences. Cited in Danis, Fran S. ( 2003 ) The criminalisation of domestic force: What societal workers need to cognize.Social Work, April 1, 2003.
6. Chez, N ( 1994 ) Helping the victim of domestic force.American Nursing1994 ; 94 ( 7 ) :32-37. Cited in Cited in Gibson-Howell, Joan C. ( 1996 ) Domestic force designation and referral.Journal of Dental Hygiene, March 1, 1996.
7. Contemporary Women’s Issues Database( 1996 ) Domestic and sexual force informations aggregation [ Part 3 of 9 ] , July 1, 1996.
8. Contemporary Women’s Issues Database( 1996 ) Measuring the costs of domestic force against adult females and the cost-effectiveness of intercessions [ Part 1 of 6 ] , May 1, 1996.
9. Contemporary Women’s Issues Database( 1993 ) Men crushing adult females: Ending domestic violence—a qualitative and quantitative survey of public attitudes on force against adult females [ Part 3 of 7 ] , April 1, 1993.
10. Contemporary Women ‘s Issues Database( 1996 ) You or person you know may populate in a place where domestic force is a job, January 1, 1996.
11. CrimeReduction.gov.uk ( 2005 ) ,Domestic forcehypertext transfer protocol: //www.crimereduction.gov.uk/domesticviolence51.htm, April 4, 2005 [ April 11, 2005 ] .
12. CrimeReduction.gov.uk ( 2005 ) ,Domestic force mini-sitehypertext transfer protocol: //www.crimereduction.gov.uk/dv01.htm, April 4, 2005 [ April 9, 2005 ] .
13. Crowell, N. A. , and Burgess, A. W. ( 1996 ) . ( Eds. ) .Understanding force against adult females.Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Cited in Danis, Fran S. ( 2003 ) The criminalisation of domestic force: What societal workers need to cognize.Social Work, April 1, 2003.
14. Cruz, J. Michael ( 2003 ) Why does n’t he merely go forth? Gay male domestic force and the grounds victims stay.The Journal of Men ‘s Surveies, March 22, 2003.
15. Danis, Fran S. ( 2003 ) The criminalisation of domestic force: What societal workers need to cognize.Social Work, April 1, 2003.
16. Dobash, R. E. , and Dobash, R. ( 1979 ) .Violence against married womans: A instance against the patriarchate. New York: Free Press. Cited in Danis, Fran S. ( 2003 ) The criminalisation of domestic force: What societal workers need to cognize.Social Work, April 1, 2003.
17. Edleson, J. L. ( 1999 ) . The convergence between child ill-treatment and adult female banging.Violence Against Women, 5 ( 2 ) , 134-154. Cited in Spath, Robin ( 2003 ) Child protection professionals placing domestic force indexs: deductions for societal work instruction.Journal of Social Work Education, September 22, 2003.
18. Gelles, R. J. , & A ; Cornell, C. P. ( 1985 ) .Intimate force in households. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Cited in Danis, Fran S. ( 2003 ) The criminalisation of domestic force: What societal workers need to cognize.Social Work, April 1, 2003.
19. Gelles, R. J. , & A ; Cornell, C. P. ( 1990 ) .Intimate force in households( 2nd ed. ) . Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications. Cited in Danis, Fran S. ( 2003 ) The criminalisation of domestic force: What societal workers need to cognize.Social Work, April 1, 2003.
20. Gibson-Howell, Joan C. ( 1996 ) Domestic force designation and referral.Journal of Dental Hygiene, March 1, 1996.
21. Hanna, Cheryl ( 1998 ) The paradox of hope: the offense and penalty of domestic force.William and Mary Law Review, May 1, 1998.
22. Hewitt, Kim ( 2002 ) , Silent victims of force in place.The News Letter( Belfast, Northern Ireland ) , September 14, 2002.
23. Isaac, Nancy E. ( 1997 ) Response to battered female parents in the paediatric exigency section: a call for an interdisciplinary attack to household force.Pediatricss, February 1, 1997.
24. Josiah, Ivy ( 1998 ) Education through wireless.Contemporary Women ‘s Issues Database, January 2, 1998.
25. Kelly, Kristin A. ( 2004 ) Working together to halt domestic force: state-community partnerships and the altering significance of public and private.Journal of Sociology & A ; Social Welfare, March 1, 2004.
26. Laurence, Louise and Spalter-Roth, Roberta ( 1996 ) Research-in-brief: Measuring the costs of domestic force against adult females [ Part 1 of 2 ]Contemporary Women ‘s Issues Database, January 1, 1996.
27. Leo, John ( 1994 ) Is it a war against adult females?U.S. News & A ; World Report, July 11, 1994.
28. Loring, M. T. and Smith, R. W. ( 1994 ) Health attention barriers and intercessions for beat-up adult females.Public HealthReports1994 ; 109 ( 3 ) :322-329. Cited in Gibson-Howell, Joan C. ( 1996 ) Domestic force designation and referral.Journal of Dental Hygiene, March 1, 1996.
29. M2 Presswire( 1998 ) Home Office: Prevention, protection and justness: A comprehensive attack to undertake domestic force, June 16, 1998.
30. Manor, John H. ( 1996 ) Helping maltreaters out of the domestic force equation.Michigan Chronicle, January 30, 1996.
31. Meyersfeld, Bonita C. ( 2003 ) Reconceptualizing domestic force in international jurisprudence.Albany Law Review, December 22, 2003.
32. Neufield, Brenda ( 1996 ) Safe inquiries: get the better ofing barriers to the sensing of domestic force.American Family Physician, June 1, 1996.
33. O’Leary, K. D. ( 1987 ) . Physical aggression between partners: A societal acquisition theory position. In V. B. Van Hasselt, R. L. Morrison, A. S. Bellack, & A ; M. Hersen ( Eds. ) ,Handbook of household force( pp. 31-55 ) . New York: Plenum Press. Cited in Danis, Fran S. ( 2003 ) The criminalisation of domestic force: What societal workers need to cognize.Social Work, April 1, 2003.
34. Salisbury, Sarah and Wichmann, Lee Anne ( 2004 ) , Seen or unobserved, domestic force traumatizes kids.The Register-Guard, August 29, 2004.
35. Schechter, S. ( 1982 )Womans and male force: The visions and battles of the beat-up adult females ‘s motion. Boston: South End Press. Cited in Danis, Fran S. ( 2003 ) The criminalisation of domestic force: What societal workers need to cognize.Social Work, April 1, 2003.
36. Seattle Post-Intelligencer( 1999 ) Domestic force: Give us statistics we can work with. July 16, 1999.
37. Shakespeare, William ( 1604 ) ,Othelloact 5. Sc. 2. Edited by Sanders, Norman. Cambridge University Press, 1984. Cited in Meyersfeld, Bonita C. ( 2003 ) Reconceptualizing domestic force in international jurisprudence.Albany Law Review, December 22, 2003.
38. Siegel, Reva B. ( 1996 ) , The regulation of love ” : Wife crushing as prerogative and privateness, 105 YALE L.J. 2117. Tuerkheimer, Deborah ( 2004 ) , Acknowledging and rectifying the injury of banging: A call to criminalize domestic force.Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, June 22, 2004.
39. Simerman, John ( 2002 ) Work force, excessively, fall victim to mistreat in large Numberss.Knight Ridder/Tribune News Service, November 25, 2002.
40. Spath, Robin ( 2003 ) Child protection professionals placing domestic force indexs: deductions for societal work instruction.Journal of Social Work Education, September 22, 2003.
41. Starr, Raymond H. , Jr. ( 2001 ) Type and timing of female parents ‘ victimization: effects on female parent and kids.Pediatricss, April 1, 2001.
42. Tuerkheimer, Deborah ( 2004 ) , Acknowledging and rectifying the injury of banging: A call to criminalize domestic force.Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, June 22, 2004.
43. Verkaik, Robert ( 2003 ) One adult male in six `a victim of domestic force ‘ .The Mugwump, September 24, 2003.
44. Wha-soon, Byun ( 1994 ) A survey on the bar of and countermeasures against domestic force [ Part 1 of 2 ] .Contemporary Women ‘s Issues Database, January 1, 1994.
45. Winkvist, Anna ( 2001 ) Researching domestic force against adult females: Methodological and ethical considerations.Surveies in Family Planning, March 1, 2001.
46. Yllo, K. A. ( 1993 ) . Through a feminist lens: Gender, power, and force. In R. J. Gelles & A ; D. R. Loseke ( Eds. ) ,Current contentions on household force( pp. 47-62 ) . Newbury Park, GA: Sage Publications. Cited in Danis, Fran S. ( 2003 ) The criminalisation of domestic force: What societal workers need to cognize.Social Work, April 1, 2003.