Family Violence Caseloads
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Volume 5 • Number 2 CASELOAD HIGHLIGHTS EXAMINING THE WORK OF STATE COURTS Tracking and Understanding Family Violence Caseloads Domestic violence is one of obstacle impeding these typically impose on offend- Furthermore, state courts the most significant issues efforts, however, is a gen- ers convicted of family have been hampered in their state courts face today, and eral lack of accurate and violence crimes? How do efforts to assess the effec- domestic violence cases are sufficiently detailed data on family violence caseloads tiveness of resources allo- a large and rising portion of family violence caseloads. compare across the states, cated to reducing family the domestic relations The courts’ inability to track and do caseload trends indi- violence, demonstrate the caseload in state courts.1 the incidents of family vio- cate the effects of the nu- need for legislative support State court leaders conse- lence from filing through merous and diverse state and grant funds for family quently are striving to de- post-adjudication leaves and federal initiatives to violence initiatives, and vise effective responses to many basic questions unan- address family violence? implement effective case family violence and its im- swered. For example, how management systems. pact on case management many felony family vio- This issue of Caseload and adjudication. A major lence, misdemeanor family Highlights introduces the The Family Violence Data violence, and protection Family Violence Data Re- Reporting Prototype ad- 1 Brian J. Ostrom and Neal B. Kauder order cases are filed in trial porting Prototype, which dresses these problems by (eds.), Examining the Work of State courts annually, and how are proposing a minimum set of Courts, 1997: A National Perspective was conceived by the Court from the Court Statistics Project these cases disposed? What Statistics Project (CSP)2 as four categories of family (Williamsburg, Va.: National Center for State Courts, 1998), p. 39. types of sanctions do judges a tool for state courts to use violence cases: felony do- in identifying, classifying, mestic violence, misde- counting, and reporting meanor domestic violence, civil protection orders, and Family Violence Data Reporting Prototype: family violence cases. The civil claims. For courts that Definition of Family Violence need for a data reporting prototype emerged when the are better able to distinguish Family violence means the occurrence of an act of vio- rising volume of family the details of domestic vio- lence, coercion, or intimidation by a family or household violence cases was being lence cases, the prototype member against another household or family member that reported to the CSP in over outlines subcategories for could result in the filing of felony or misdemeanor charges, 20 different categories. This each of the four main cat- the issuance of a civil protection order, or an action for lack of clear and coherent egories. For example, the civil damages. Family or household members include: reporting has severely im- subcategories for felony and (a) persons who are current or former spouses; (b) persons peded the CSP’s ability to misdemeanor family vio- who are intimate partners who live together or who have track and analyze family lence cases are homicide lived together; (c) persons who are dating or who have violence caseload trends (felony only), physical as- dated; (d) persons who are engaged in or who have en- over time or to compare sault, sexual assault, prop- gaged in a sexual relationship; (e) persons who are related caseloads across states. erty crimes, and stalking. by blood or adoption; (f) persons who are related or for- The prototype also includes merly related by marriage; (g) persons who have a child in sections for reporting infor- common; and (h) minor children of a person in a relation- 2 A principal goal of the Court Statistics mation on the manner of ship that is described in paragraphs (a) through (g). Project (CSP) is to overcome data collec- tion problems by promulgating nationally case disposition, trial out- accepted terms and definitions that make statistics uniform and comparable. comes, and sentencing. National Center for State Courts Brian J. Ostrom, Project Director • Susan Keilitz, Ann M. Jones, and Brian J. Ostrom, Authors April 1999 Tracking and Understanding Family Violence Caseloads ▼ of definitions and data ele- a family violence physical experts and practitioners; 5 National Initiatives to ments for the surveillance of assault may potentially be a comprehensive review Measure Family Violence family violence.3 linked with many interrelated of state statutes relating to Family violence has implica- cases, including felony family violence; and a sur- Few state courts currently tions for many fields of charges, civil protection or- vey of 18 courts. have the capacity to collect criminal justice, social wel- ders, divorce filings, and data on specific types of fare, health care, victim ad- petitions for child custody, family violence cases (e.g., vocacy, and community ser- child support, dependency, ▼ New Jersey, Washington, and Testing the Family vices. The courts are begin- and juvenile delinquency. Florida), but as this Caseload Violence Data ning to catch up with law Therefore, depending on the Highlights reveals, this situa- Reporting Prototype enforcement, prosecution, individual court’s classifica- tion is improving. However, and social services in devel- tion strategy, a case involving The prototype was pilot greater availability and com- oping ways to identify, clas- family violence may be tested for six months in 1998 parability of family violence sify, and count incidents of counted multiple times as to gain a better understanding information from the state family violence. For ex- civil, criminal, and/or juve- of the current availability of courts will be critical to the ample, for the past decade nile cases. family violence data in state success of the national move- law enforcement agencies courts and the ability of ment to explore and address The challenge in developing have been moving toward courts to report this data. issues of family violence the Family Violence Data standardized local and state Demonstration courts were through multiple perspectives. Reporting Prototype was to Incidence-Based Reporting recruited randomly and se- present a clear, informed, and (IBR) systems and participa- lected primarily on their inclusive definition of family tion in the National Incident- willingness to test the proto- ▼ violence 4 while offering a Based Reporting System. type. A basic premise of the Developing the Family flexible classification and These IBR systems capture demonstration test was that Violence Data Reporting reporting model that can be individual case characteris- Prototype court structure and automated adjusted to accommodate tics that can be used to iden- system constraints would individual state statutes and tify family violence offenses Implementing an instrument limit the number of courts address the evolving needs and other victim and offender such as the Family Violence that could collect data for all and capabilities of state information that can be criti- Data Reporting Prototype is of the reporting categories. courts across the country. cal for successfully prosecut- difficult because of the wide Major impediments to full The prototype was developed ing and appropriately adjudi- variation among courts on a reporting by the individual to meet this challenge using cating family violence cases. number of relevant factors, courts included the lack of the expert opinion of the Like the courts, the health including the scope and re- jurisdiction for all of the case Conference of State Court care system is a relative new- finement of automated data types in the prototype, the Administrators Court Statis- comer to measuring family systems, jurisdiction over jurisdiction of more than one tics Committee and an advi- violence. The Centers for family violence cases, and court or division over the sory committee of court man- Disease Control, the National the types of crime or actions same case types, the lack of agers and domestic violence Institute of Health, and the defined or identified as fam- integration of the data from National Institute of Justice ily violence. In addition, each court or division, and family violence cases rarely 4 Child dependency cases are not included recently have been partner- in the definition of family violence, but conform to traditional, non- criminal abuse and neglect cases are ing to promote data collec- 5 included. The members of the advisory committee tion and analysis from clini- overlapping case classifica- were Sharon Denaro, Domestic Violence Project Manager, Superior Court for the cal studies of family vio- tion strategies. For example, District of Columbia; Daniel J. Hall, Direc- tor of Planning & Analysis, Colorado lence and the standardization Judicial Department; Barbara J. Hart, Associate Director, Battered Women’s 3 The Family and Intimate Violence Justice Project; Jennifer Juhler, Domestic Prevention Team (FIVPT) has defined and Abuse Intervention Coordinator, State of pilot tested a minimum set of data elements Iowa; Howard P. Schwartz, Judicial Admin- needed for surveillance of intimate partner istrator, State of Kansas; and Linda Saltzman violence. For more information, see the (liaison), Centers for Disease Control. FIVPT’s Web site at www.cdc.gov/ncipc/ dvp/fivpt/fivpt.htm. the inability of the case infor- utility of the prototype