This paper will discuss the issue of battered woman syndrome. It will discuss the pro side, presented by Attorney Douglas A. Orr and the con side, presented by Professor Joe W. Dixon. With one side arguing that battered woman syndrome is a valid defense for woman and the other side trying to prove that it is unjustifiable and that battered woman syndrome does not exist.
Battered Woman Syndrome
Battered women who claim that killing their husbands, living boy friends and even their fathers because it was the only way they could escape their abuse, have used the battered woman syndrome as their defense. Some claim that it is and should be a valid defense for a woman that has been abused but there are those who believe that it has not been accepted in the field of psychology by serious and rigorous empirical researchers and that there is no reliable means to identify who suffer from it and those who claim it as a legal defense (Dixon, 2003). In this paper the author will discuss his finding on both viewpoints, the pro side and the con side of battered woman syndrome as presented by both Douglas A. Orr and Joe W. Dixon. There are two facts presented by the pro side that should be considered before taking any sides on this issue. The pro side states the fact that over 50 percent of all murders in occur with their partners, whether they are husband and wife or a live in boyfriend (Orr, 2003). That means that of all murders that are committed in the United States, half are family related. It is also a fact that the overwhelming majority of battering victims are women (Orr, 2003). The con side also had two facts as well that one must take into consideration on the issue of battered woman syndrome. The con side notes that there are numerous nonspecific signs or conditions that clinicians, are biased towards battered woman syndrome, will read in the report of a woman relating a history of battering thus concluding the woman is suffering from battered...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document