| Introduction
Although widely misunderstood even among legal
professionals, "battered woman syndrome"
is not a legal defense. It is one approach to
explaining battered women's experiences. Like
other "social framework testimony,"
( Vidmar & Schuller, in press ), expert
testimony concerning battering and its effects
is used in the legal system to help a judge
or jury better understand a battered woman's
experience ( Federal Rules of Evidence 702 ).
The purpose of this paper is to offer a critique
of the concept battered woman syndrome as a
means of framing battered women's experiences
( Gordon & Dutton, 1996 ).
Review of the concept battered woman
syndrome
The concept of battered woman syndrome has
evolved from its inception in the late 1970's.
Initially, it was conceptualized as "learned
helplessness," a condition used to explain
a victim's inability to protect herself against
the batterer's violence that developed following
repeated, but failed, efforts to do so ( Walker,
1977-78 ). Another early formulation of battered
woman syndrome referred to the the cycle of
violence ( Walker, 1984 ), a theory that describes
the dynamics of the batterer's behavior. The
cycle of violence theory can be used to explain
how battered victims are drawn back into the
relationship when the abuser is contrite and
attentive following the violence. More recently,
battered woman syndrome has been defined as
post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) ( Walker,
1992 ), a psychological condition that results
from exposure to severe trauma. Among other
things, PTSD can explain why a battered victim
may react, because of flashbacks and other intrusive
experiences resulting from prior victimization,
to a new situation as dangerous, even when it
is not.
In the courtroom, expert testimony concerning
domestic violence can be offered for various
purposes: (1) to show that a defendant is a
battered woman, (2) to explain a battered woman's
state of mind, (3) to generally support a claim
(e.g., when a battered victim is suing a batterer
for damages) or the validity of a particular
defense (i.e., when a battered victim is the
defendant), (4) to explain a battered woman's
conduct, (5) to explain a battered woman's recantation
or resistance to prosecution (i.e., when a battered
victim is witness in prosecution case), (6)
to bolster a battered woman's credibility, or
(7) to explain the existence of mitigating factors
(i.e., for purposes of sentencing when a battered
woman has been found guilty in a criminal trial)
( Parish, 1996 ). Statutes and case law vary
from state to state and across federal jurisdictions;
in some, this testimony is referred to as "battered
woman syndrome." The critique that follows
derives from the view that syndrome language
generally, and battered woman syndrome more
specifically, is inadequate to the task of describing
battered women's experience, whether for purposes
of expert testimony, counseling, or advocacy.
Critique of the concept "battered
woman syndrome"
There has been a great deal of progress in
the admissibility of expert testimony in criminal
cases involving battered victims under the rubric
of "battered woman syndrome." However,
in domestic violence cases the "courts
have focused on a syndrome model to the exclusion
of other research that, though less legally
convenient, more accurately depicts the social
and psychological consequences of domestic violence"
( Schuller & Hastings, in press ). There
are a number of concerns that suggest the need
for a reformulation of this model. Five such
points are described below.
1. There is no single profile of a battered
woman.
"Battered woman syndrome" signals
a particular area of testimony or type of case.
One advantage of a short-hand label is ease
of communication. The disadvantage is related:
"battered woman syndrome" has become
a stereotype that often does not fit the current
state of knowledge concerning battering and
its effects. Further, the stereotypic image
of "battered woman syndrome" is often
clouded by other stereotypes such as those based
on race, culture, social class, and sexual orientation,
for example.
There is no single profile of the effects of
battering although "battered woman syndrome"
suggests that the psychological impact of battering
is defined by a common set of symptoms. Nevertheless,
battered women's reactions to violence and abuse
vary; they include emotional reactions (e.g.,
fear, anger, sadness); changes in beliefs and
attitudes about self, others, and the world
(e.g., self-blame, distrust, generalized belief
that the world is unsafe); and symptoms of psychological
distress or dysfunction dysfunction (e.g., depression,
flashbacks, anxiety, sleep problems, substance
abuse). A particular battered woman's reactions
may or may not meet criteria to warrant a clinical
diagnosis. Variations in women's traumatic response
to battering are based on characteristics of
(1) the violence and abuse, (2) the battered
victim, and (3) the context or environment in
which battering occurs and in which the battered
woman must respond to and heal from it, e.g.,
based on racial and cultural factors, social
class, social support.
2. The term "battered woman syndrome"
is vague.
There is no clearly defined set of criteria
to define "battered woman syndrome."
If the label "battered woman syndrome"
is reserved only for battered women with specific
types of reactions (e.g., posttraumatic stress
disorder), then using it instead of the diagnosis
term is confusing especially since battered
woman syndrome is not a recognized diagnostic
term in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) ( American Psychiatric
Association, 1994 ). Further, other reactions
to battering that are relevant to pending legal
(or other) issues may be excluded from consideration.
Alternatively, if the term is used more broadly
to refer to a range of psychological reactions
to battering, as it often is in actual testimony
by experts, then its diagnostic utility is lost
since there is no clearly defined criteria for
inclusion. In this case, the question of whether
a battered woman "suffers" from battered
woman syndrome is not an appropriate question:
its meaning is vague and can be misleading.
3. Posttraumatic stress disorder, compared
to other psychological reactions to battering,
is not uniquely relevant for understanding legal
(or other) domestic violence-related issues.
PSTD can result from exposure to domestic violence
and it may be relevant for explaining a victim's
fear or other behavior in a specific situation.
However, there is no basis to suggest that PTSD
has exclusive or even greater relevance, for
either legal or clinical issues, than do other
types of psychological reactions to battering.
Importantly, the absence of PTSD does not signal
the lack of other posttraumatic stress reactions
nor does it negate the reasonableness of a battered
woman's fear. To the contrary, posttraumatic
reactions leading to diagnoses other than PTSD
(e.g., Acute Stress Disorder, Dissociative Amnesia,
Major Depressive Disorder), as well as those
which do not constitute clinical diagnoses (e.g.,
fear, anger, transient dissociative reaction,
shame, distrust), may in some cases be more
salient for understanding pertinent legal or
clinical issues. For example, understanding
the battered woman's appraisal of specific batterer
behavior as threatening is typically more relevant
both for addressing specific legal issues and
for victim advocacy than merely whether or not
she meets diagnostic criteria for PTSD. As well,
victim's depression or suicidal thoughts as
a reaction to battering may be more salient
for addressing victim's current safety or for
understanding her previous actions.
4. The relevant information relied upon for
expert testimony in legal cases, advocacy, and
clinical interventions involving battered victims
extends beyond the psychological effects of
battering.
The various purposes of expert testimony (see
"Review" above), advocacy, and clinincal
intervention typically require information in
addition to the battered victim's psychological
reactions to battering. This information includes
(1) an analysis of the dynamics of violence
and abuse, (2) the battered victim's strategic
responses to violence (i.e., what she did in
attempting to resist, avoid, escape, or stop
the violence), (3) the short- and long-term
outcome of those efforts, and (4) the social
and psychological context in which the battering
occurred (e.g., cultural and ethnic factors,
economic factors, social network, the battered
victim's prior traumatic experiences, the response
of the police and other institutions to the
battering) ( Dutton, 1993 ; Gordon & Dutton,
1996 ). The body of knowledge that forms the
foundation of expert testimony, advocacy, or
clinical intervention cannot be adequately defined
by a single construct or diagnosis, including
battered woman syndrome.
5. The term "battered woman syndrome"
creates an image of pathology.
Battered woman syndrome language creates a stereotyped
image of pathology. A woman characterized as
suffering from battered woman syndrome may be
viewed as flawed, damaged, disordered, or abnormal
in some way. Although it is true that many battered
victims suffer negative effects of battering,
syndrome language necessarily places the emphasis
on pathology, not on the whole picture that
also includes the battered woman's strengths
and efforts, as well as other's responses to
the situation. Notably, a battered victim's
normal reaction of fear or anger can be the
most important issue for explaining her state
of mind at the time of an alleged crime or for
understanding her motivation for other behavior.
Further, it may be essential to explain the
apparent absence of fear, for example, by considering
how cultural factors influence the manner of
emotional expression. An expert witnesses' attempt
to refocus attention away from pathology after
having invoked the concept "battered woman
syndrome" can be confusing and appears
contradictory. The term "battered woman
syndrome" may inadvertently communicate
to the jury or judge the misguided notion of
an "abuse excuse." Use of the term
battered woman syndrome perpetuates stereotypic
images of battered women.
Conclusion
An extensive scientific and professional literature
concerning traumatic experiences, including
domestic violence and victims' reactions to
it, provides a solid foundation for expert testimony
in cases involving battered women. Expert testimony
concerning battering and its effects cannot
adequately rely on a single construct such as
"battered woman syndrome": the comprehensive
body of existing knowledge cannot be so condensed.
Instead, focus should be on identifying the
specific questions relevant to the issues at
hand for which there is a body of knowledge
to support a valid conclusion.
References
American Psychiatric Association. (1994).
Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders. Fourth Edition. Washington, DC: American
Psychiatric Association.
Dutton, M.A. (1993). Understanding women's
responses to domestic violence: A redefinition
of battered woman syndrome. Hofstra Law Review
, 21(4), 1191-1242.
Federal Rules of Evidence 702.
Gordon, M. and Dutton, M.A. (1996). Validity
of "battered woman syndrome" in criminal
cases involving battered women. In U.S. Departments
of Justice and Health and Human Services. The
validity and use of evidence concerning battering
and its effects in criminal trials: Report responding
to section 40507 of the Violence Against Women
Act . (NCJRS #160972).
Parish, J. (1996). Trend analysis: Expert testimony
on battering and its effects in criminal cases.
In U.S. Departments of Justice and Health and
Human Services. The validity and use of evidence
concerning battering and its effects in criminal
trials: Report responding to section 40507 of
the Violence Against Women Act . (NCJRS # 160972).
Schuller, R. and Hastings, P.A. (in press).
Battered woman syndrome and other psychological
effects of domestic violence against women.
In D.L. Faigman, D. Kaye, M. J. Saks, and J.
Sanders (Eds.), The West companion to scientific
evidence .
Vidmar, N. and Schuller, R.A. (1989). Juries
and expert evidence. Social framework testimony.
Law and Contemporary Problems , 133.
Walker, L.E. (1977-78). Battered women and
learned helplessness. Victimology: an International
Journal , 2(3/4), 525-534.
Walker, L.E. (1984). The battered woman syndrome
. New York: Springer Publishing Co.
Walker, L.E. (1992). Battered women syndrome
and self-defense. Symposium on Woman and the
Law, Notre Dame Journal of Law, Ethics and Public
Policy , 6(2), 321-334.
|
