scholarly journals Protective Orders, Property Interests and Prior Restraints: Can the Courts Prevent Media Nonparties from Publishing Court-Protected Discovery Materials?

1996 ◽  
Vol 144 (6) ◽  
pp. 2463 ◽  
Author(s):  
Giles T. Cohen
Keyword(s):  
Protective Orders

scholarly journals Armed, Prohibited and Violent at Home: Implementation and Enforcement of Restrictions on Gun Possession by Domestic Violence Offenders in Four U.S. Localities

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shannon Frattaroli ◽  
April M. Zeoli ◽  
Daniel W. Webster
Keyword(s):  
Domestic Violence ◽  
Violence Prevention ◽  
Intimate Partner Homicide ◽  
State Laws ◽  
Protective Orders ◽  
Implementation Models ◽  
Domestic Violence Prevention ◽  
Depth Interviews ◽  
Insight Into

AbstractFirearms increase the risk of lethality in violent intimate relationships. Policies that restrict access to firearms by respondents to civil domestic violence protective orders (DVROs) are associated with reductions in intimate partner homicide, yet there is scant literature about how such prohibitions are implemented. We document how four localities are implementing gun possession prohibitions that result from civil and criminal restraining orders and domestic violence misdemeanor convictions; and assess the findings in the context of Kingdon’s agenda setting framework. We identified four jurisdictions where gun dispossession of prohibited domestic violence offenders was underway and collected data through in-depth interviews, site visits, and documents. We coded the data, identified explanatory themes, and compared the findings to Kingdon’s framework. The four jurisdictions have policies ranging from no state laws restricting domestic violence offenders’ access to guns to comprehensive state laws. We describe implementation initiatives to dispossess prohibited people of their guns in the four jurisdictions, two distinct implementation models through which gun dispossession occurs, and an expanded application of Kingdon’s model. In each jurisdiction, we identified one or more individuals who championed implementation. Policies that prohibit domestic violence offenders from possessing guns are promising, and possible in diverse settings and jurisdictions. Here we provide insight into implementation efforts in four jurisdictions, emphasize the role of individuals in prioritizing implementation, and highlight the potential to realize these restrictions across states with different laws. Focusing on implementation is a much-needed paradigm shift that complements the traditional focus on passing domestic violence prevention laws.

Health and Rural Context Among Victims of Partner Abuse: Does Justice Matter?

2016 ◽  
Vol 33 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert Walker ◽  
T. K. Logan
Keyword(s):  
Procedural Justice ◽  
Rural Women ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Urban Areas ◽  
Urban Women ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Protective Order ◽  
Protective Orders ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Health And Well Being

Research typically compartmentalizes health and justice as separate areas of study. However, the current health literature on inequality suggests the two concepts are overlapping. For victims of partner violence, procedural justice (defined in this article as access to protective orders and enforcement of protective orders) potentially provides a step toward improved health and well-being by improving safety. There has been limited research examining these factors in rural compared with urban areas. This study examines the impact of procedural justice on health and well-being through interviews with rural and urban women 6 months prior to, and 6 months after, obtaining a protective order. Consistent with other literature, rural women who were victims of partner violence reported worse health, higher stress, and higher Stress-Related Consequences Scale scores compared with urban women. Women’s reported health consequences were related to the interaction of perceived ineffectiveness of the protective orders and their rural/urban environment. Thus, the perceived effectiveness of procedural justice may play an important role in alleviating victims’ safety, health, and well-being, all of which are components of contemporary views of justice.

Risky sexual behavior among women with protective orders against violent male partners

2006 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 103-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Cole ◽  
T. K. Logan ◽  
Lisa Shannon
Keyword(s):  
Sexual Behavior ◽  
Risky Sexual Behavior ◽  
Male Partners ◽  
Protective Orders

Domestic Violence Protective Orders: A Qualitative Examination of Judges’ Decision-Making Processes

2015 ◽  
Vol 32 (13) ◽  
pp. 1921-1942 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine Agnew-Brune ◽  
Kathryn E. (Beth) Moracco ◽  
Cara J. Person ◽  
J. Michael Bowling
Keyword(s):  
Domestic Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Negative Impact ◽  
The United States ◽  
District Court ◽  
Legal Intervention ◽  
Protective Orders ◽  
Decision Making Processes ◽  
States Experience

Approximately one in three women in the United States experience intimate partner violence (IPV). IPV is associated with long-term negative health consequences; therefore, there is a need to examine potential prevention strategies. Evidence suggests that domestic violence protective orders (DVPOs), a legal intervention that prevents contact between two parties for up to 12 months, are an effective secondary prevention tool. However, because judges have relative autonomy in granting or denying DVPOs, research is needed to examine the processes they use to guide their decisions. The aim of the study was to investigate how District Court judges decide whether to issue a DVPO. Using in-depth interviews with 20 North Carolina District Court judges, the present study addressed three research questions: (a) what factors influence judges’ decisions to grant or deny a DVPO, (b) what heuristics or cognitive shortcuts potentially guide their decisions, and (c) what judges worry about when making decisions. Three themes emerged from the data analyses: (a) violent incidents must reach a certain threshold, (b) the presence of children creates competing concerns, and (c) judges worry about the negative impact their decisions may have on the lives of those involved. Recommendations for improving the DVPO issuance process are also discussed.

scholarly journals The Denial of Emergency Protection: Factors Associated With Court Decision Making

2008 ◽  
Vol 23 (5) ◽  
pp. 603-616 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carol E. Jordan ◽  
Adam J. Pritchard ◽  
Pamela Wilcox ◽  
Danielle Duckett-Pritchard
Keyword(s):  
Intimate Partner Violence ◽  
Partner Violence ◽  
Intimate Partner ◽  
Fiscal Year ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Emergency Protection ◽  
Factors Associated ◽  
Judicial Education ◽  
Protective Orders ◽  
Intimate Partner Violence Research

Despite the importance of civil orders of protection as a legal resource for victims of intimate partner violence, research is limited in this area, and most studies focus on the process following a court’s initial issuance of an emergency order. The purpose of this study is to address a major gap in the literature by examining cases where victims of intimate partner violence are denied access to temporary orders of protection. The study sample included a review of 2,205 petitions that had been denied by a Kentucky court during the 2003 fiscal year. The study offers important insights into the characteristics of petitioners and respondents to denied orders and outlines individual, contextual, structural, qualitative/perceptual, and procedural factors associated with the denial of temporary or emergency protective orders. Recommendations for statutory changes, judicial education, and future research to remedy barriers to protection are offered.

Rule 26(c) Protective Orders and the First Amendment

1980 ◽  
Vol 80 (8) ◽  
pp. 1645
Author(s):  
Susan M. Angele
Keyword(s):  
First Amendment ◽  
Protective Orders

“If I Can’t Have You Nobody Will”: Explicit Threats in the Context of Coercive Control

2017 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 126-140 ◽  
Author(s):  
TK Logan
Keyword(s):  
Partner Abuse ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Future Research ◽  
Physical Assault ◽  
Coercive Control ◽  
Research Attention ◽  
Protective Orders ◽  
History Of ◽  
Trajectory Features ◽  
Harm To Others

Physical assault is only one tool in partner abuse characterized by coercive control. Coercive control creates an ongoing state of fear and chronic stress. Explicit threats are an important component of coercive control yet have received limited research attention. This study examined 210 women with protective orders (POs) against abusive (ex)partners and their experiences of explicit threats including threats of harm and death, threats about harming friends and family, and actual threats to friends and family. There are 4 main findings from this study: (a) explicit threats of harm and death, threats about harming others, and actual threats to others are common both in the history of the abusive relationship as well as within 6 months prior to obtaining a PO but are only moderately correlated with each other; (b) the high-frequency threats of harm group had the highest rates of concurrent abuse, violence, distress, and fear; (c) the prevalence and frequency of threats changed over time for all 3 types of threats examined in this study; and (d) understanding the variety of threats partner abuse victims experience, especially threats of third-party harm, may be important in understanding the larger context and consequences of partner abuse. This study is an interim step toward a better understanding of the role of explicit threats in abusive relationships. Future research is needed to examine the prevalence, frequency, trajectory, features, context, and types of explicit threats that victims of partner abuse experience. This information may be especially key to understanding more about future risk of harm, risk of harm to others, victim distress and fear, and safety planning.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document