Does Arresting Spousal Batterers Do More Harm Than Good
I believe that arresting spousal batterers can never do any harm. The research study presented by Schmidt and Sherman seamed very bias. After being proven to be misinterpreted by Stark my beliefs were held strong. Spousal batterers need to be reprehended and the victims need to be protect the minute they call for police help. Distancing the victim from their attacker can be a major help in allowing the victim to realize her reality. The time the batterer is away doesn't make a lot of difference. Besides no one in his or her right mind is going to want to go to jail or be arrested again, at least for while longer. I do believe that mandatory arrest give women a sense of power provided for them by the government. Many of these women do not have it in them to make the officers arrest their attacker. They feel they are doing wrong in having them arrested. However, they have courage enough to call authorities to their rescue. This is a major step in their rehabilitation. Once they stand up for themselves they will build the power to leave or divorce their spouse in a near future. Whether the batterer learns from his experience or continues to be a batterer, mandatory arrest is meant to help the victim from a moment of distress. The benefits should be based on protecting the victim. Although the attacker needs help renouncing this habit or sickness, the true victim needs protection from physical harm, which is a more substantial matter. I do agree with programs destined to help these couples in this social disease. However, that should come after the fact. Meaning after the authorities have done their job in protecting the true victims. Privacy can play an important and desirable role for women. Privacy can allow a battered woman individual self-development and decision-making opportunities important in ensuring her autonomy, equality and liberty. Critics claim that for women who have been battered, these aspects...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document