| 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.
|
