A review of pro-arrest,pro-charge,and pro-prosecution policies as a response to domestic violence

Abstract

Summary

The focus of this scoping review was to understand the overall state of research activity related to pro-arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies in Canada. The review identified 295 articles, academic (47.5%) and gray literature (52.5%) published between 1983 and 2018 that reported on these policies as a response to domestic violence in Canada.

Findings

The findings acknowledged growing concerns over the ineffectiveness of these policies as a response to domestic violence. In fact, over half of the articles (57.6%) either failed to support these policies or recommended significant revisions; only a small number of articles (1.0%) favored these policies in their current form. Themes related to the effectiveness of these policies included criminalization and public awareness, survivor satisfaction, standardized police response, removal of burden from survivor to charge, and better than nothing. Themes related to the ineffectiveness included disconnect between policy and practice, revictimizes survivors, one-size fits all approach, have not adequately reduced domestic violence in Canada, lack of understanding training and education for all, failure to address structural and systemic factors, lack of trust in the criminal justice system, and success has been difficult to measure.

Applications

The deconstruction of these policies in this review points to the need for future research to address identified gaps in the literature and to explore alternatives that serve their intended emancipatory effect.

Keywords

Social work domestic violence family violence social policy social justice social work research

Introduction

In 2017 in Canada, domestic violence comprised 30% of all violent crime reported to police and affected 96,000 survivors, aged 15–89 (Burczycka et al., 2018). From 2007 to 2017, there were 933 victims of domestic homicide (Burczycka et al., 2018). While this information reported by Statistics Canada builds an understanding of this phenomenon, it is also critical to note that domestic violence remains underreported in Canada (Perreault & Brennan, 2010).

Pro-arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies were implemented by the Government of Canada, in cooperation with the Solicitor General and local police departments, in jurisdictions across Canada in the 1980s and 1990s with intention of improving the criminal justice system’s (CJS) response to domestic violence (Barata & Schneider, 2004; Davidson, 2004; H. Johnson, 2012; Sinha, 2010). These policies have contributed to the criminalization of domestic violence in Canada by providing legal authority for police and prosecution to proceed with criminal charges, where reasonable and probable grounds exist that domestic violence has occurred (Barata & Schneider, 2004; Davidson, 2004; Department of Justice, 2010). In effort to remove the responsibility from survivors for pursuing criminal action against perpetrators, these policies have allowed for the arrest and prosecution of perpetrators without the need for survivor influence over the charging decision (Davidson, 2004).

The introduction of these policies was largely the result of influence from the women’s movement which demanded that Canadian society understand domestic violence as a serious matter (Davidson, 2004). The overall intentions of these policies were to ensure survivor safety and hold perpetrators accountable for their violence (Barata & Schneider, 2004; Davidson, 2004). It was believed that the strict guidelines for the CJS that were inherent in these policies would serve as a deterrent for domestic violence (Davidson, 2004).

Prior to the implementation of these policies, responses to domestic violence favored separation and mediation, over arrest and prosecution (H. Johnson, 2012). Pro-arrest and pro-charge policies for police appeared first in most jurisdictions, followed by the implementation of pro-prosecution policies soon after (H. Johnson, 2012). Although beyond the scope of this review, it is important to note that these policies are not unique to Canada and have also been implemented in United States (Davidson, 2004).

While these policies have effectively contributed to the recognition of domestic violence in the CJS, there have also been considerable critique regarding their ability to effectively address and reduce domestic violence in Canada (Nelund, 2015). Critiques of these policies fall on a spectrum from those who support the rationale behind the policies but highlight inadequacies in the implementation process, to those who question the very premise of the policies ( Rumscheidt, 1996; Scott et al., 2017; Singer, 2012).

While the term “effectiveness” in research generally refers to systematic proof that something achieves a set of specified outcomes, and usually in comparison to either a control group or an alternative type of intervention; the authors used “effectiveness” in this scoping review to identify if specific themes related to these policies, and extracted from these primarily qualitative articles, produced emancipatory and/or intended results.

In order to fully grasp the extent of research activity around these policies, the authors contend that this scoping review would be the best approach because it is a robust method for identifying both primary and secondary literature (Davis et al., 2009). According to Arksey and O’Malley (2005), there are four potential reasons why researchers undertake a scoping review. First, to examine the extent and nature of research activity; second, to identify whether a systematic review is necessary; third, to summarize and disseminate research findings; and fourth, to identify potential research gaps within the existing literature (2005, p. 21). This scoping review considers research findings and draws conclusions from the existing literature regarding the state of research activity. It facilitates the identification of gaps in the literature where no research has previously been conducted, with the potential to summarize and convey findings (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005).

Method

This scoping review followed the framework established by Arksey and O’Malley (2005) and subsequent enhancements by Levac et al. (2010). This framework identifies six different stages in undertaking a scoping study: (1) identifying the research question, (2) identifying relevant studies, (3) study selection, (4) data collection, (5) data summary and synthesis of results, and (6) consultation.

Identifying research questions

The focus of the scoping review was to explore what is known about pro-arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies as a response to domestic violence in Canada. To ensure that a substantial range of literature was captured relating to the topic, we posed the following initial research questions to guide the search:

Do pro-arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies remain the most effective response to domestic violence in Canada?

How are pro-arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies effective at responding to domestic violence?

How are pro-arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies ineffective at responding to domestic violence?

Identifying relevant studies

Key concepts and search terms were developed to capture literature that related to pro-arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies as a response to domestic violence in Canada. A university librarian was consulted who was a subject specialist in the field of social work and social sciences in general. Their input was useful in the refinement of key search terms and identifying databases most likely to produce the results sought. Techniques for searching included the use of search tools such as subject headings and Boolean operators to narrow, widen, and combine literature searches. The descriptive key search terms that were developed to guide the search are outlined in Table 1.

Table 1.

Key term search strategy.

Search terms
Initial	“Pro-arrest, pro-charge, pro-prosecution policies”	(“Pro-arrest, pro-charge, pro-prosecution” OR “Pro-arrest policies/policy” OR “Pro-charge policies/policy” OR “Pro-prosecution policies/policy” OR “Proarrest policies/policy” OR “Pro arrest policies/policy” OR “Mandatory arrest rule/rules” OR “Mandatory arrest policy/policies” OR “Zero tolerance policies/policy” OR “Zero-tolerance policies/policy” OR “Presumptive arrest policies/policy” OR “No-drop policy/policies” OR “No drop policy/policies” OR “Proactive arrest policy/policies”)
	“Domestic Violence”	(“Domestic Violence” OR “Intimate Partner Violence” OR “Intimate Terrorism” OR “Situational Couple Violence” OR “Intimate Partner Abuse” OR “Violence in Intimate Partner Abuse” OR “Violence in Intimate Relationships” OR “Violent resistance” OR “Mutual Violent Control” OR “Domestic Disturbance” OR “Partner Abuse” OR “Domestic Abuse” OR “Wife Abuse” OR “Sexual Violence” OR “Family Violence” OR “Wife Assault” OR “Spousal Violence” OR “Spousal Assault” OR “Intimate Partner Aggression”)
	“Canada”	No synonyms used
Modified	“Pro-arrest, pro-charge, pro-prosecution policies”	(“Pro-arrest, pro-charge, pro-prosecution” OR “Pro-arrest policies/policy” OR “Pro-charge policies/policy” OR “Pro-prosecution policies/policy” OR “Proarrest policies/policy” OR “Pro arrest policies/policy” OR “Mandatory arrest policy/policies” OR “Zero tolerance policies/policy” OR “Zero-tolerance policies/policy” OR “Presumptive arrest policies/policy” OR “No-drop policy/policies” OR “No drop policy/policies” OR “Proactive arrest policy/policies”)
	“Domestic Violence”	(“Domestic Violence” OR “Intimate Partner Violence” OR “Intimate Partner Abuse” OR “Domestic Disturbance” OR “Partner Abuse” OR “Domestic Abuse” OR “Wife Abuse” OR “Sexual Violence” OR “Family Violence” OR “Wife Assault”)
	“Canada”	No Synonyms used

In an effort to be as comprehensive as possible in the identification of relevant resources, inclusion and exclusion criteria were developed. As noted earlier, pro-arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies were implemented by the Government of Canada, in cooperation with the Solicitor General and local police departments, in jurisdictions across Canada in the 1980s and 1990s (Barata & Schneider, 2004; Davidson, 2004; H. Johnson, 2012; Sinha, 2010). Therefore, the time period 1980–2018 was considered appropriate. A full list of inclusion and exclusion criteria is outlined in Table 2.

Table 2.

Inclusion and exclusion criteria.

Criterion	Inclusion	Exclusion
Time period	1980–2018	Studies outside these dates
Language	English	Non-English resources
Geography	Canada	Non-Canadian
Resource type	Academic, gray	Non-academic, non-gray
Literature focus	Must describe the policies and/or discuss the policies as a response to domestic violence. Can be qualitative, quantitative, or both	Does not describe the policies or discuss the policies as a response to domestic violence
Type of relationship	Not limited to heterosexual relationships, will include same-sex relationships, “non-traditional” relationships	n/a
Gender identity	Not limited to male-female binary, will include transgender and non-binary individuals	n/a

Thirteen electronic databases were searched: Academic Search Premier, Canadian Public Policy Collection, CBCA Complete, EBSCOhost, Gender Studies, Google, NCJRS: National Criminal Justice Reference Service, PAIS Index, ProQuest, PsycINFO, Sociological Abstracts, Social Services Abstracts, and Social Work Abstracts. In addition, a hand search of reference lists for most of the articles dated 2015 or newer was carried out.

The review of the literature was completed over three months, ending in March 2019, and involved significant time and labor due to the number/size of the articles deemed appropriate.

Study selection

Using the key search terms, 2426 articles were identified. For each article, a review of the content was conducted, which consisted of scanning the abstracts and/or the conclusions, and in some instances, the entire article. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied to these 2426 articles, and duplicates were removed, resulting in 295 articles being identified as relevant to the research topic.

As outlined in Table 2, when reviewing the articles, the two reviewers looked to include articles that described the policies and/or discussed the policies as a response to domestic violence in Canada. Specifically, the two reviewers collected information from each article related to what position, if any, did the article take on the policies, and any identified strengths and challenges of the policies. As per Table 2, articles were excluded if they did not describe the policies and/or discuss the policies as a response to domestic violence in Canada. While the keywords selected did result in a tremendous volume of articles, many of these articles did not fit the inclusion criteria, for example, the articles may have focused on policies in the United States or elsewhere; other topics related to domestic violence; topics related to public safety; and/or police practice in non-domestic violence incidents. Full text versions of the articles were obtained; however, the reviewers rarely reviewed the entire articles, and in most cases relied on a brief scan of the abstract/introduction/executive summary and/or the conclusion. The reviewers began by ensuring the articles fit the inclusion criteria, then moved to look for information to respond to the three research questions. Figure 1 illustrates the process of article selection.

RefWorks, a web-based research management tool, was used to organize the 2426 articles. Separate folders were created within RefWorks to indicate which articles would be included in this review and which would be excluded. Both reviewers collected the relevant data to be entered into RefWorks, and one reviewer was responsible for the overall data entry and management in RefWorks.

Data collection

Microsoft Excel was used to develop a spread sheet for tracking information related to articles being included in this review. The following information was collected for each of the 295 articles: date the article was located, title of the article, author(s) of the article, year of publication, location published, location related to subject matter, article type, and a response to the three research questions used to provide framework for the main research question. Detail of included studies is provided in Table 3.

Table 3.

Academic literature.

Academic literature: 140 resources
Type	Total number of resources	Method	Number of resources
Journals	51	Quantitative	13
		Qualitative	12
		Theoretical	24
		Mixed method	2
Books	13	Qualitative	3
		Theoretical	9
		Mixed method	1
Book sections	8	Qualitative	3
Book sections	8	Theoretical	5
Theses	46	Quantitative	14
		Qualitative	19
		Theoretical	10
		Mixed method	3
Dissertations	22	Quantitative	6
		Qualitative	10
		Theoretical	1
		Mixed method	5

Data summary and synthesis of results

Following the collection and charting of this information on the spreadsheet, the research team met multiple times to develop themes related to the responses to the three research questions. These themes guided the process of thematic coding. Two reviewers applied thematic coding in a systematic fashion, to each of the 295 articles. The themes were then analyzed to create an understanding of how frequent certain themes were in relation to the 295 articles.

Findings

In this section, we describe the body of literature identified by this scoping review and provide brief responses to our research questions based on the information extracted from the literature.

This review yielded 295 articles from across Canada, with the province Ontario making the largest contribution to the literature. The provinces of British Columbia, Nova Scotia, Manitoba, Alberta, and New Brunswick also made noteworthy contributions; there were notable absences in contributions from the province of Newfoundland and Labrador, and the three territories, Northwest Territories, Nunavut, and the Yukon.

The date of publication followed a steady incline leading up to the implementation period of the policies in the 1980s and 1990s and peaked between 2000 and 2004. While the majority of the articles were published between 1995 and 2014, there has been a steady decline in publications over the past five years.

This body of literature consisted of a fairly equal distribution of academic (47.5%) and gray literature (52.5%). Of the 140 academic articles, 51 (17.3%) were academic journals. Of these 51 academic articles identified, strong representation was noted from psychology, sociology, criminology, and law and limited representation was noted from social work, gender studies, anthropology, political science, and health sciences. Tables 4 and 5 provide further detail on the academic and gray literature included in this review.

Table 4.

Gray literature.

Gray literature: 155 resources
Type	Total number of resources
Reports	71
Newspapers	53
Magazine	16
Policy documents	5
Webpages	5
Transcriptions of court proceedings	3
Unpublished draft of literature review	1
Transcription of TV program	1

Table 5.

Summary of Literature Reviewed.

What is known about pro-arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies as a response to domestic violence in Canada? Total = 295 resources
Do pro-arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies remain the most effective response to domestic violence in Canada?		How are pro- arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies effective at responding to domestic violence?		How are pro- arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies ineffective at responding to domestic violence?
Themes	Number of resources (%)	Themes	Number of resources (%)	Themes	Number of resources (%)
No. these policies do not remain the most effective response to domestic violence in Canada.	116 (39.3)	Criminalization and public awareness	51 (17.3)	Disconnect between policy and practice	164 (55.6)
No overt position. These policies are discussed, competing arguments may be presented, but no position is taken.	117 (39.7)	Public awareness	45 (15.3)	Lack of coordination and infrastructure within and between systems	71 (24.1)
Yes, but … These policies remain the most effective response to domestic violence, however, adjustments to these policies are required.	54 (18.3)	Criminalization	34 (11.5)	Inconsistent application	67 (22.7)
n/a. These are official policy documents and do not offer any analysis or position-taking.	5 (1.7)			Have significant impact on the practice of law	52 (17.6)
		Survivor satisfaction	40 (13.6)
Yes. These policies remain the most effective response to domestic violence. No adjustments are required.	3 (1.0)			Negative attitudes toward policies	19 (6.4)
		Survivor safety	28 (9.5)
				Fundamentally unjust toward alleged perpetrators	12 (4.1)
		Survivor empowerment	19 (6.4)
				Lack of survivor input in their development	6 (2.0)
		Standardized police response	25 (8.5)	Lack of accountability	3 (1.0)
		Improved police response	22 (7.5)
				Revictimize survivors	157 (53.2)
		Eliminates police discretion	14 (4.7)
				Disempower survivors	102 (34.5)
		Removes burden from survivors to charge their partners	21 (7.1)	Fail to provide safety and security	78 (26.4)
				Contribute to dual arrest and criminalization of survivors	54 (18.3)
		Better than nothing	11 (3.7)
				Places the needs of survivors at odds with society	52 (17.6)
				One-size fits all	150 (51.0)
				Inflexible to the individual needs of survivors and perpetrators	80 (27.1)
				Negative implications of these policies are intensified for oppressed populations	75 (25.4)
				Do not respond to the continuum of domestic violence	71 (24.0)
				Lack of consideration of the impact on children and families	31 (10.5)
				Limit police discretion	17 (5.7)
				Have not adequately reduced domestic violence in Canada	68 (22.3)
				Lack of understanding, training and education for all	43 (14.2)
				Failure to address structural and systemic factors	42 (14.2)
				Lack of trust in the criminal justice system	13 (4.4)
				Success has been difficult to measure	13 (4.4)

Do pro-arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies remain the most effective response to domestic violence in Canada?

Findings from this review indicated that 57.6% of the articles either failed to support these policies as an effective response to domestic violence (39.3%) or recommended significant revisions to these policies (18.3%). Only 1% of the articles reviewed supported these policies, in their current form, as an effective response to domestic violence. The three articles that represented the 1% were academic and dated 1983, 1995, and 1998.

How are pro-arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies effective at responding to domestic violence?

This review identified five areas where these policies have been effective at responding to domestic violence: contributing to criminalization and increased public awareness (17.3%) (Bartuk, 2002; Cameron, 2012; Rossiter et al., 2014; Tutty et al., 2010; Wood, 2001; Zellerer, 1996); satisfying the needs of survivors (13.6%) (Cross, 2012; Davidson, 2004; Dutton, 1995; Government of Canada, 2015; Jiwani & Buhagiar, 1997; Kaukinen, 2001; Light & Ruebsaat, 2008; Tutty et al., 2008; E. J. Ursel, 2001; Wilson, 1998); standardizing police response (8.5%) (Atrooshi, 2010; M. Russell & L. Light, 2006; Seymour, 1998; Tutty & Goard, 2002; J. Ursel, 1998); removing survivors’ responsibility to charge their partners (7.1%) (Pacey, 2001; Riggs, 2011); and being better than no response (3.7%) (Drumbl, 1994; Macleod & Picard, 1989; L. Russell, 2009).

How are pro-arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies ineffective at responding to domestic violence?

This review identified eight areas where these policies have demonstrated some level of ineffectiveness as a response to domestic violence: disconnect between policy and practice (55.6%), revictimize survivors (53.2%), one-size fits all approach (51.0%), have not adequately reduced domestic violence in Canada (22.3%), lack of training, understanding, and education for all (14.2%), failure to address structural and systemic factors (14.2%), lack of trust in the CJS (4.4%), and success has been difficult to measure (4.4%). Due to the volume of information available in three of these categories, they have been broken down into subthemes.

Disconnect between policy and practice

Approximately half of the articles (164) highlighted a disconnect between the intention of these policies and their actual application. Seven subthemes emerged: lack of coordination and infrastructure within and between systems (24.1%), inconsistent application (22.7%), have significant impact on the practice of law that do not serve the needs of survivors (17.6%), negative attitude toward policies (6.4%), fundamentally unjust toward alleged perpetrators (4.1%), lack of survivor input in their development (2.0%), and lack of accountability (1.0%).

Revictimize survivors

Approximately half the articles (157) highlighted how these policies revictimize survivors. Four subthemes emerged: disempowerment of survivors (34.5%), failure to provide safety and security to survivors (26.4%), dual arrest, countercharging, and the criminalization of survivors (18.3%), and places the needs of survivors at odd with the wider interests of society (17.6%).

One-size fits all approach

Approximately half of the articles (150) highlight the ineffectiveness of the one-size fits all nature of these policies. Five subthemes emerged: inflexible to the individual needs of survivors (27.1%), negative implications of these policies are intensified for individuals, and communities who are socially, racially, and economically oppressed (25.4%), do not respond to the continuum of domestic violence (24.0%), lack consideration of the impact on children and families (10.5%), and limit police discretion (5.7%).

Discussion

In this section, we summarize our findings from this body of literature to provide a panoramic overview of what is currently known about the pro-arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies in Canada and conclude with implications for social work.

Safety, justice, hope, and help

We believe that an integral part of improving responses to domestic violence in Canada is acknowledging the contributions that have provided the foundation to do this work. It is important that we recognize the profound impact these policies have had on shaping our values, beliefs, and responses to domestic violence in Canada; as well as bringing safety, justice, hope, and help to many survivors and families. These policies have been credited for bringing the once private issue of domestic violence into the public realm (Bartuk, 2002; Cameron, 2012; Rossiter et al., 2014; Wood, 2001; Zellerer, 1996), for introducing a strong societal message that domestic violence is not acceptable (Tutty et al., 2010), and for putting pressure on the CJS to take domestic violence seriously (Light & Ruebsaat, 2008; Minaker, 1998; Nelund, 2015).

For some survivors, these policies have satisfied their needs for safety (Cross, 2012; Davidson, 2004; Light & Ruebsaat, 2008; E. J. Ursel, 2001) and empowerment (Cross, 2012; Dutton, 1995; Wilson, 1998). In some cases, having a perpetrator charged can provide an opportunity for a survivor to develop plans to move forward with their life in a way that ensures their safety and the safety of their children (Cross, 2012). In some cases, a perpetrator may use these interactions with the CJS as an opportunity to access supports and make changes in their behavior, which in turn, can prove beneficial for a survivor and their family (Cross, 2012). Pacey (2001) and Riggs (2011) argue that the shift in responsibility to charge the perpetrator, from the survivor to the CJS, triggered by the implementation of these policies, is beneficial for some survivors, particularly for those who may have otherwise been too fearful to engage with the CJS (Pacey, 2001; Riggs, 2011).

Standardization of police response to domestic violence has also been noted as an effective contribution of these policies (M. Russell & L. Light, 2006), specifically in how this standardization has improved police response (M. Russell & L. Light, 2006; J. Ursel, 1998; Zellerer, 1996), and eliminated police discretion (Atrooshi, 2010; Seymour, 1998; Tutty & Goard, 2002; J. Ursel, 1998). For some survivors, the stricter police response mandated by these policies has contributed to improved well-being and higher levels of satisfaction with police (M. Russell & L. Light, 2006; J. Ursel, 1998; Zellerer, 1996). For some police, the elimination of discretion has helped clarify their role (Atrooshi, 2010; J. Ursel, 1998) and eliminated bias in decision-making, with respect to incidents of domestic violence (Seymour, 1998; Tutty & Goard, 2002).

Shortcomings, silence, fear, and tragedy

While we have recognized the important contributions these policies have made to improving responses to domestic violence in Canada, there is an urgent need to address areas where these policies have failed to provide safety, justice, hope, and help, to survivors and their families, and to use this knowledge to create change. As so many others have said, much has changed in the field of domestic violence, and the world, over the past 40 years, and thus, policies guiding responses to domestic violence must be reflective of these changes. In order to develop such policies, we must identify and understand the shortcomings of these policies, and how these policies have contributed to silence, fear, and tragedy in the lives of so many Canadians who have been impacted by domestic violence.

Disconnect between policy and practice

There is strong support in the literature that the effectiveness of these policies have been compromised by a lack of coordination and infrastructure within the CJS (Balfour, 2003; Bandan, 2009; Briskin & Eliasson, 1999; Bruce, 2005; Clairmont & Waters, 2015; Jarvis, 2000; Rossiter et al., 2014; Rubin, 2003; Rumscheidt, 1996; Wood, 2001) and between the CJS and other systems (Briskin & Eliasson, 1999; Morris, 2008). Within the CJS, two main factors have been identified as contributing to this lack of coordination and infrastructure; the incompatibility of the traditional justice system in addressing domestic violence (Bandan, 2009; Briskin & Eliasson, 1999; Clairmont & Waters, 2015; H. Johnson, 2010; Wood, 2001), and inadequate resources among police and crown to meet the increased workload resulting from these policies (Balfour, 2003; Rossiter et al., 2014).

Inadequate resources outside of the CJS are also seen to contribute to this lack of coordination and infrastructure, specifically where it relates to meeting the needs of survivors, perpetrators, and their families (Briskin & Eliasson, 1999; Morris, 2008), and in situations involving underrepresented populations (Morris, 2008). It is also been argued that these policies perpetuate negative experiences with other systems and structures, such as child protection services, immigration, family court, and income assistance (Luke’s Place Support and Resource Centre for The Denise House, 2008).

Many argue that the inconsistent and inadequate application of these policies interferes with the overall effectiveness of these policies (Bruce, 2005; Jarvis, 2000; Rubin, 2003; Rumscheidt, 1996). Kaert (2013) argues that the issue is not with these policies themselves but the general interpretation of them, which Jiwani and Buhagiar (1997) indicate can vary from province to province in Canada. Inconsistent and inadequate application of these policies is thought to have many negative consequences, including as severe as serving as a contributing factor to domestic homicide (Edmonds, 2002).

There is some support in the literature that the CJS’s overall incapacity to understand and respond to the complex needs of domestic violence survivors has interfered with the effectiveness of these policies (Balfour, 2003; Dutton, 2010; Faubert, 1995; Konarski, 2002; E. J. Ursel, 2001). For example, where most domestic violence cases lack independent witnesses and material evidence, successful prosecution becomes dependent on survivor cooperation (Konarski, 2002; E. J. Ursel, 2001). This dependence becomes problematic when survivors are unprepared for and/or disinterested in the CJS’s response (Dutton, 2010) and can contribute to high rates of stay of proceedings (E. J. Ursel, 2001). Further, the literature has yielded a small area of support that lack of survivor input in the development of these policies has contributed to the disconnect between policy and practice (Bannerji, 2008).

Negative attitudes toward the policies by legal players, police, prosecution, and defense lawyers are also noted in the literature to impact the overall effectiveness of these policies (Atrooshi, 2010; Balfour, 2003; Bruce, 2005; Hannah-Moffat, 1995; Macleod & Picard, 1989; MacQuarrie, 2005). Negative attitudes can include ambivalence, dislike, and resentment for domestic violence cases (Balfour, 2003; Gillis et al., 2006); overt racism, sexism, and classism (Briskin & Eliasson, 1999; Davidson, 2004); and a belief that discretion to charge or prosecute was been eroded (Macleod & Picard, 1989; MacQuarrie, 2005). Some argue these negative attitudes will have greater influence on the responses to domestic violence than the actual guidelines for responses outlined in these policies (Atrooshi, 2010; Bruce, 2005; Hannah-Moffat, 1995). The literature revealed a small area of support that lack of accountability for police, prosecution, and the CJS as a whole, with respect to the application of these policies, has contributed to a disconnect between policy and practice (Bannerji, 2008; Van De Sande, 1998).

Some argue these policies are fundamentally unjust toward alleged perpetrators (Cohen, 2002; Dutton, 2012; O’Neill, 2002a, 2002b). For example, some argue that these policies have put so much pressure and responsibility on police and prosecution to react to allegations of domestic abuse that false accusations, poor investigations, wrongful prosecutions, and wrongful convictions have resulted (Cohen, 2002; Dutton, 2012; O’Neill, 2002a, 2002b).

Revictimize survivors

The literature identifies the disempowering nature of these policies as the most significant contributing factor to the revictimization of survivors (McGillivray & Comaskey, 1999; Scott et al, 2017). Three ways in which these policies disempower survivors were identified: preventing survivors from reaching out for help (Agnew, 1998; Bartuk, 2002; Community Coordination for Women’s Safety (CCWS), 2007; Dutton, 1995; H. Johnson, 2012; H. Johnson & M. Dawson, 2010; Riggs, 2011; Wood, 2001); depriving and limiting a survivors freedom to choose (Chewter, 2003; Emerson, 2012; Ludwig, 1996; Nova Scotia Criminal Justice Association, 2017; Pais, 2016); and perpetuating gender inequality (Landsberg, 2000; Pais, 2016).

For some survivors, these policies fail to provide safety and security from violence, as well as from social and economic implications (Briskin & Eliasson, 1999; Singer, 2012), and in fact can function to perpetuate and exacerbate these harms (Singer, 2012; Wachholz & Miedema, 2000). H. Johnson and M. Dawson (2010) highlight how these policies can punish women for seeking help by restricting the control they have over their lives during a time when these women need the most control. Chewter (2003) argues that depriving a survivor the freedom to choose whether or not to charge the perpetrator, simply relocates the control and coercion of the survivor, from the perpetrator, to the CJS. Ludwig (1996) argues for some survivors the control and coercion of CJS can be much worse than the control and coercion of the perpetrator. Dutton (2012) argues that the pro-prosecution portion of these policies can generate an unwillingness of some survivors to reutilize the CJS, placing some survivors at an increased risk of domestic homicide (Dutton, 2012). Pais (2016) and Landsberg (2000) argue that these policies encourage and perpetuate gender inequality, for example, by using state power to hold women accountable for men’s violence (Landsberg, 2000), and thus reinforcing experiences of power imbalance and oppression experienced by women (Pais, 2016).

Dual arrests, countercharging, and the criminalization of survivors are also seen as significant areas of revictimization in the literature, which many argue have increased since the implementation of these policies (Hagemann-White et al, 2015; Pollack et al., 2005; Wood, 2001). Two explanations for this increase consider the gender neutral orientation of these policies ( Leduc, 2004; Pollack et al., 2005) and a lack of training and understanding of domestic violence within the CJS (Chewter, 2003; Hagemann-White et al, 2015; Leduc, 2004). Some argue that the gender neutral orientation of these policies fails to critically address the underlying systemic gender inequity that perpetuates violence against women in society ( Tam et al., 2013) and instead provides de-contextualized, de-gendered, and de-politicized understandings of women’s use of force (Leduc, 2004; Pollack et al., 2005). Dual arrest, countercharging, and the criminalization of survivors can have devastating impacts for both survivors and the CJS (CCWS, 2007; Chewter, 2003; Wood, 2001). For survivors, the negative implications can include decreased chance of seeking further help (CCWS, 2007; Chewter, 2003; Wood, 2001), reduced access to legal support within the CJS (Wood, 2001), denial of access to support services due to their involvement as perpetrators in the CJS (CCWS, 2007), and increased potential for domestic homicide (CCWS, 2007). For the CJS, negative implications can include liability (CCWS, 2007), decreased ability to prosecute (CCWS, 2007) but increased difficulty to avoid going to trial (Chewter, 2003), overburdened workloads and staff attrition (Wood, 2001).

The literature also indicates that revictimization can occur for a survivor because these policies provide a response to domestic violence that places the needs of survivors at odds with the needs of society (Cameron, 2012; Goguen, 1999; Jarvis, 2000; Konarski, 2002; L. Russell, 2009; Wisniewski, 2016; Zellerer, 1996). Feminist discourse argues that many survivors reach out to the CJS for safety, and freedom from violence, and not for systemic intervention (Cameron, 2012; Goguen, 1999; Jarvis, 2000; L. Russell, 2009; Zellerer, 1996); however, under these policies, the needs of survivors have become secondary to the needs of the CJS (Goguen, 1999).

One-size fits all approach

Perhaps one of the most mainstream critiques of these policies, which is also been supported in this literature, is the limited effectiveness of these policies because of their one-size fits all approach in responding to domestic violence. Many argue the rigid nature of these policies has made them ineffective at responding to the individual needs of survivors and perpetrators (Dickson-Gilmore, 2014; Dutton, 1995; Miedema & Wachholz, 1998; S. Paterson, 2009; Rumscheidt, 1996; Scott et al, 2017), as well as to the continuum of domestic violence (H. Johnson, 2010; Miedema, 2004; Nova Scotia Department of Justice Victims’ Services Division, 2001; Singer, 2012). For example, these policies do not differentiate with respect to the severity of violence involved in the relationship (Nova Scotia Department of Justice Victims’ Services Division, 2001), nor do these policies make space for survivors who do not wish to engage with the CJS (Singer, 2012). As these policies represent the interests of only a small population of individuals, many survivors and perpetrators can experience feelings of alienation by the CJS (S. Paterson, 2009). For survivors, this alienation can limit future engagement with the CJS and place them at an increased risk for future harm (Miedema & Wachholz, 1998).

Many argue that for those who are socially, racially, and economically marginalized, the rigid nature of these policies makes it so they are less likely to have their needs met, and more likely to experience the negative impacts of these policies. The literature identifies those who are socially, racially, and economically marginalized to include women (Anonymous, 2008; Cross, 2012; Minaker, 1998, 2001; Tam et al., 2013); Indigenous Peoples (Boyd, 1997; Conners & Johnson, 2017; Girard-Brown, 2012; Tutty & Goard, 2002; E. J. Ursel, 2001); African Canadians (Addario, 2002; Cain, 2010; Tutty et al., 2011); newcomers (Alaggia et al., 2009; Girard-Brown, 2012; L. Russell, 2009; Singh, 2010; Wachholz & Miedema, 2000); South Asians (Bandan, 2009; Hunjan, 2003; Kharat, 2014; Thandi & Lloyd, 2011); persons with disabilities (Atrooshi, 2010; Fraser, 2014; Morris, 2008; S. L. Paterson, 2006); the rainbow community (Fraser, 2014; Girard-Brown, 2012; Moser, 2012); low income (Tutty & Goard, 2002; Tutty et al., 2008); rural (Atrooshi, 2010; Jarvis, 2000; Wisniewski, 2016); sex workers (Morris, 2008); homeless (Morris, 2008); and individuals living with mental health and/or substance abuse challenges (Anonymous, 2008; Fraser, 2014; Morris, 2008).

Some argue that these policies lack consideration of their impact on children and families (Kharat, 2014; O’Neill, 2002a; Pigg, 2009a, 2009b). For some families, the intrusion of the state can instill feelings of regret, fear, shame, and powerlessness, and in some cases can increase incidents of domestic abuse (Kharat, 2014). For some families, these policies result in the criminalization of parents, caregivers, and guardians (O’Neill, 2002a), encourage separation, compromise bonds, and impact the emotional health of children (Kharat, 2014; Pigg, 2009a, 2009b).

A small area of the literature highlights how the lack of police discretion inherent in these policies limit the effectiveness of these policies (Atrooshi, 2010; Macleod & Picard, 1989; Tutty & Goard, 2002; E. J. Ursel, 2001).

Have not adequately reduced domestic violence in Canada

These policies have not adequately reduced domestic violence in Canada (Bartuk, 2002; Beckstead, 2006; Konarski, 2002; Lustman, 2008; Tam et al., 2013; Tutty et al., 2011; Wilson, 1998). Some argue that the CJS alone does not, and cannot ever, have the transformative power to eradicate, or even seriously reduce domestic violence (Bartuk, 2002; Beckstead, 2006; Konarski, 2002; Lustman, 2008). Some argue that survivors need more than the law has to offer (Wilson, 1998) and that criminal justice interventions do not serve as deterrents for all perpetrators (Tutty et al., 2011).

Lack of understanding, training, and education for all

Some findings identified an overall lack of understanding, training (Rossiter et al., 2014), and education related to these policies (Be The Peace, 2017; Emerson, 2012; Rubin, 2003), among survivors and perpetrators (Abel, 2007; Emerson, 2012), those working in the CJS (Be The Peace, 2017; Cohen, 2002; Rubin, 2003), and the general public (Abel, 2007; Dickson-Gilmore, 2014; Kharat, 2014; McGillivray & Comaskey, 1999).

Failure to address structural and systemic factors

Some findings highlighted how these policies have failed to address the structural and systemic factors inherent in domestic violence (Abraham & Tastsoglou, 2016; Bannerji, 2008; Cheema, 1993; Davidson, 2004; Jarvis, 2000; H. Johnson, 2012; Rumscheidt, 1996). Some argue that these policies have contributed to narrow understandings of domestic violence, as solely issues of the CJS and social services (Abraham & Tastsoglou, 2016; Jarvis, 2000); that for example, lack a feminist analysis of the structural and systemic factors, such as patriarchy, that both enable domestic violence, and govern the systems and structures that manage domestic violence (Abraham & Tastsoglou, 2016; Jarvis, 2000). Some claim that it is not enough to just develop, implement, and promote these policies as a response to domestic violence, when for example, there is no equal effort being made to disrupt attitudes of male supremacy and stereo types regarding battered women (Cheema, 1993; Davidson, 2004). H. Johnson (2012) argues that these efforts to implement legislative change devoid of addressing the need for a larger cultural change are in fact distorting the nature of the problem.

Lack of trust in the CJS

There is a small area of support that the effectiveness of these policies may be compromised by lack of trust in the CJS (Agnew, 1998; Miedema & Wachholz, 1998, 1999, 2004). For example, some argue systemic racial biases, and other negative experiences with the CJS, make these policies ineffective as survivors will not reach out for help from a CJS they do not trust (Agnew, 1998; Miedema & Wachholz, 1998, 1999).

Success has been difficult to measure

A small area of literature noted difficulties with being able to measure success with these policies (E. J. Ursel, 2001; Wood, 2001).

Implications for social work

As noted in the summary of the academic articles identified for this review, social work was not strongly represented among the professions contributing to this body of research. The authors suggest that the profession of social work’s commitment to social justice and its recognition of the importance of a relational focus inculcates the profession to increased engagement in this area. Indeed, the profession of social work is unique in centering its commitment to social justice in their Code of Ethics. The International Federation of Social Workers (2020) provides a global social work statement of ethical principles that recognize social work as both a practice-based profession and an academic discipline that facilitates social change, social cohesion, and the empowerment of people. The pervasive and persistent prevalence of domestic violence compels social work to advocate for enhanced intervention and prevention efforts and contribute to research and policy that advocates for both.

Limitations

One of the primary strengths of a scoping review is the ability to provide a thorough and systematic approach to mapping areas of research, with respect to volume, nature, and characteristics of primary research, in a relatively short period of time; however, an inherent limitation of this approach is the lack of formal appraisal of the quality of evidence from the primary research sources (Arksey & O’Malley, 2005). This review did not include a formal appraisal of the quality of evidence from the 297 resources. Also, while we made every effort to capture all resources related to these policies within Canada, in the English language, through our rigorous search strategy, it is possible that some resources were missed.

Another area of limitation in this review is the influence of own biases and worldviews on the process of developing and implementing the framework necessary to describe the large body of research identified in this review. We have all had experiences with domestic violence in our lives, whether as social workers serving clients, professionals working in the CJS, survivors, witnesses, or a combination of any of these. These are the experiences that have so passionately drawn us to this work, and we wholeheartedly acknowledge, although it is immeasurable, how they have shaped both the process and outcome of this review.

Conclusion

The purpose of this scoping review was to understand the overall state of research activity related to pro-arrest, pro-charge, and pro-prosecution policies as a response to domestic violence in Canada. Two-hundred and ninety-seven articles were identified, and 57.8% (172 articles) either failed to support these policies as an effective response to domestic violence (117) or recommended significant revisions (55). Only three articles showed support for these policies, in their current form, as an effective response to domestic violence.

Themes related to the ineffectiveness of these policies were significantly more represented than themes related to the effectiveness of these policies, however, there were noteworthy findings for each of these areas. In terms of the effectiveness of these policies, the most notable findings related to how they have contributed to the criminalization and public awareness of domestic violence, as well as survivor satisfaction. In terms of ineffectiveness, the most notable findings related to the disconnect between policy and practice, revictimizing survivors, one-size fits all approach, have not adequately reduced domestic violence, lack of understanding, training, and education for all, and a failure to address structural and systemic factors.

The following gaps in research were identified: a steady decline in resources over the past five years, a lack of representation from some areas of Canada; limited representation from social work and health sciences; and an overall limited representation of academic literature. Further, there was limited representation related to the experiences and perspectives of African Canadians, children, persons with disabilities, the rainbow community, as well as the military and ageing populations; and an absence of a complex analysis of domestic violence that goes beyond traditional understandings. Future research must explore the identified gaps, as well as investigate and analyze responses to domestic violence in other countries. This review has offered a valuable deconstruction of these policies, while also emphasizing areas where these policies have improved responses to domestic violence in Canada for many. The authors suggest that further attention is required regarding the implementation of these policies to prevent harm and consideration of complementary or alternative responses.

Ethics

Research ethics was not required for this review of the literature.

Footnotes

Authors’ contribution

Cary Ryan, as research assistant for this project was responsible for conducting the literature review and contributed to the thematic data analysis and summary of the findings. Dr Silvio, in his capacity as librarian provided guidance and direction specific to the research and literature review process and contributed to the thematic data analysis and summary of the findings. Tara Borden, in her capacity as a graduate student and research assistant, contributed to the research process, thematic data analysis, and summary of the findings. Dr Ross, as principal investigator of this project, initiated and directed the research and literature review; led analysis, summary, and presentation of findings.

Funding

This research has been funded by the Department of Justice Canada; file number 9487464.

ORCID iD

Nancy M Ross

References

Abel

S. L.

(2007). Justice? Interviews with front-line domestic violence workers (Publication No. 304788195) [Master’s thesis]. University of Victoria; Social Services Abstracts.

Abraham

Tastsoglou

(2016). Addressing domestic violence in Canada and the United States: The uneasy co-habitation of women and the state. Current Sociology, 64(4), 568–585. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011392116639221

Addario

(2002). Six degrees from liberation: Legal needs of women in legal and other matters. Canada Department of Justice, Programs Branch, Research and Stats Division, Legal Aid and Research Series.

Agnew

(1998). In search of a safe place: Abuse women and culturally sensitive services. University of Toronto Press.

Alaggia

Regehr

Rishchynski

(2009). Intimate partner violence and immigration laws in Canada: How far have we come? International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 32(6), 335–341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijlp.2009.09.001

Anonymous. (2008). Women and the Canadian legal system: Examining situations of hyper-responsibility. Canadian Woman Studies, 26(3), 94–104.

Arksey

O’Malley

(2005). Scoping studies: Towards a methodological framework. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 8(1), 19–32.

Atrooshi

C. E.

(2010). Dual charging practices in cases of domestic violence: Perpetuating (in)equalities (Publication No. 859916018) [Master’s thesis]. Carleton University; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

Balfour

(2003). The practice of law as structured action: The role of lawyers in the criminalization of violent men and women (Publication No. 305289086) [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Manitoba; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

10.

Bandan

(2009). The obstacles South Asian victims of spousal violence endure in Vancouver, Canada: Culture vs. the extended family vs . the law (Publication No. AAIMS23758) [Master’s thesis]. Simon Fraser University; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

11.

Bannerji

(2008). Theoretical frameworks in the construction of domestic violence discourse in socio-legal literature (Publication No. 304395488) [Master’s thesis]. York University; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

12.

Barata, P. C., & Schneider, F. (2004). Battered women add their voices to the debate about the merits of mandatory arrest. Women's Studies Quarterly, 32(3–4), 148–163.

13.

Bartuk

(2002). Aid or band-aid? Perspectives from the front-lines on community treatment programs for abusive men (Publication No. 305470916) [Master’s thesis]. Simon Fraser University; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

14.

Be The Peace. (2017). Pathways to justice. Be The Peace Institute.

15.

Beckstead

(2006). Violence, policy and the law: An exploratory analysis of crown counsel’s domestic violence policy in British Columbia (Publication No. 304943490) [Master’s thesis]. Simon Fraser University; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

16.

Boyd

S. B.

(1997). Challenging the public private divide. University of Toronto Press.

17.

Briskin

Eliasson

(1999). Women’s organizing and public policy in Canada and Sweden. McGill-Queen’s University Press.

18.

Bruce

S. L.

(2005). “ It’s not all the cops”—Investigating the variances in police responses to woman abuse (Publication No. 305362019) [Master’s thesis]. The University of New Brunswick; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

19.

Burczycka

Conroy

Savage

(2018). Family violence in Canada: A statistical profile, 2017. The Canadian Centre for Justice Statistics, Statistics Canada.

20.

Cain

(2010). Connecting discourse, policy, and practice: Practitioners’ perceptions of the influence of dominant discourses and stories surrounding women who experience abuse by their intimate male partners (Publication No. 608325025) [Master’s thesis]. Dalhousie University; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

21.

Cameron

A. J.

(2012). Restoring women: Community and legal responses to violence against women in opposite sex intimate relationships (Publication No. 1442476256) [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Victoria; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

22.

Cheema

(1993). International perspectives on violence against women (Publication No. 89226106) [Master’s thesis]. University of Ottawa; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

23.

Chewter

C. L.

(2003). Violence against women and children: Some legal issues. Canadian Journal of Family Law, 20(1), 99–178.

24.

Clairmont

Waters

(2015). The Nova Scotia Restorative Justice Program: Assessment of current status and future directions. Atlantic Institute of Criminology, Dalhousie University. Prepared for The Nova Scotia Restorative Justice Program, Police and Public Safety, Nova Scotia Department of Justice.

25.

Cohen

(2002, October 21). Did ‘must prosecute’ mean ‘must convict’? The Report Newsmagazine, 29(20), 37.

26.

Community Coordination for Women’s Safety (CCWS). (2007). Dual arrest in cases of relationship violence.

27.

Conners

D. E.

Johnson

(2017). What do women survivors of partner abuse think about mandatory charging? A review of the research. University of Ottawa.

28.

Cross

(2012). It shouldn’t be this hard: A gender-based analysis of family law, family court and violence against women. Luke’s Place Support and Resource Centre.

29.

Davidson

C. L.

(2004). Protection orders , partner abuse and police liability: A socialist feminist analysis (Publication No. 305200124) [Master’s thesis]. Carleton University; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

30.

Davis

Drey

Gould

(2009). What are scoping studies? A review of the nursing literature. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 46(10), 1386–1400. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2009.02.010

31.

Department of Justice. (2010). Domestic violence action plan. Province of Nova Scotia.

32.

Dickson-Gilmore

(2014). Whither restorativeness? Restorative justice and the challenge of intimate violence in aboriginal communities. Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, 56(4), 417–446. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjccj.2014.S02

33.

Drumbl

M. A.

(1994). Civil, constitutional and criminal justice responses to female partner abuse: Proposals for reform. Canadian Journal of Family Law, 12(1), 115–170.

34.

Dutton

(1995). The domestic assault of women: Psychological and criminal justice perspectives. UBC Press.

35.

Dutton

(2010). The gender paradigm and the architecture of antiscience. Partner Abuse, 1(1), 5–25. https://doi.org/10.1891/1946-6560.1.1.5

36.

Dutton

(2012). The prevention of intimate partner violence. Prevention Science, 13(4), 395–397. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-012-0306-1

37.

Edmonds

(2002, October 30). Winnipeg’s 911 inquest report misses mark, says lawyer for victims’ family. Canadian Press Newswire. http://ezproxy.library.dal.ca/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/359666995?accountid=10406

38.

Emerson

(2012). Taking care in child protection: A descriptive account of practices with women who have experienced violence by their domestic partners (Publication No. 1069261858) [Master’s thesis]. University of Victoria; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

39.

Faubert

(1995). Police intervention in cases of wife assault: A critical perspective on the mandatory arrest policy (Publication No. 304207307) [Master’s thesis]. University of Guelph; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

40.

Fraser

(2014). Claims-making in context: Forty years of Canadian feminist activism on violence against women (Publication No. 1521132350) [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Ottawa; Canadian Business & Current Affairs Database.

41.

Gillis

J. R.

Diamond

S. L.

Jebely

Orekhovsky

Ostovich

E. M.

MacIsaac

Mandell

(2006). Systemic obstacles to battered women’s participation in the judicial system. Violence Against Women, 12(12), 1150–1168. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801206293500

42.

Girard-Brown

A. L.

(2012). Do good intentions beget good policy? Two steps forward and one step back in the construction of domestic violence in Ontario (Publication No. 1512651308) [Doctoral dissertation]. Queen’s University; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

43.

Goguen

(1999). A study into the impact of feminism upon legal discourse in criminal justice policies on wife battering in Canada (Publication No. 304566018) [Master’s thesis]. University of Ottawa; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

44.

Government of Canada. (2015). Charging and prosecution policies in cases of spousal assault: A synthesis of research, academic, and judicial responses.

45.

Hagemann-White

Humphreys

Tutty

Diemer

(2015). Overview of current policies on arrest, prosecution and protection by the police and the justice system as responses to intimate partner violence. In H. Johnson, B. Fischer, & V. Jaquier (Eds), Critical issues on violence against women: International perspectives and promising strategies (pp. 47–65). Routledge.

46.

Hannah-Moffat

(1995). To charge or not to charge: Frontline officers’ perceptions of mandatory charge policies. In M. Valverde, L. MacLeod, & K. Johnson (Eds), Wife assault and the Canadian criminal justice system (pp. 35–46). Centre of Criminology, University of Toronto.

47.

Hunjan

(2003). South Asian women in Canada: Experiences of intimate partner violence (Publication No. 305324886) [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Windsor; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

48.

International Federation of Social Workers. (2020). Global social statement of ethical principles.

49.

Jarvis

S. L.

(2000). Domestic violence and the state-abused women’s perspectives on the “new” integrated services approach (Publication No. 08989095) [Master’s thesis]. University of Windsor; Masters Abstract International.

50.

Jiwani

Buhagiar

(1997). Policing violence against women in relationships: An examination of police response to violence against women in British Columbia. FREDA Centre for Research on Violence Against Women and Children.

51.

Johnson

(2010). Protecting victims’ interests in domestic violence court. Muriel McQueen Fergusson Centre for Family Violence Research University of New Brunswick.

52.

Johnson

(2012). “No-drop policies” are harming some women. Social Sciences at the University of Ottawa.

53.

Johnson

Dawson

(2010). Violence against women in Canada: Research and policy perspectives. Oxford University Press.

54.

Kaert

(2013). Help or hindrance: The impact of the mandatory charge policy. Trent University. Elizabeth Fry Society of Peterborough.

55.

Kaukinen

C. E.

(2001). The help-seeking of violent crime victims (Publication No. 60412953) [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Toronto; Sociological Abstracts.

56.

Kharat

(2014). Power, helplessness and compromising: Influences of resettlement on incidence of intimate partner violence (Publication No. 1651939618) [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Calgary; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Full Text: The Humanities and Social Sciences Collection.

57.

Konarski

R. D.

(2002). Domestic violence and the criminal justice system: An empirical study on the response by police and prosecutors to domestic violence in two communities in British Columbia (Publication No. 305258138) [Master’s thesis]. Simon Fraser University; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

58.

Landsberg

(2000, May 4). Spousal abuse: The military’s top challenge. Toronto Star. http://ezproxy.library.dal.ca/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/438133934?accountid=10406

59.

LeDuc

L. R.

(2004). Understanding female-to-male violence in Canadian university and college dating relationships—A test of the rebellion thesis (Publication No. 60495798) [Doctoral dissertation]. Carleton University; Dissertations Abstract International.

60.

Levac

Colquhoun

O’Brien

K. K.

(2010) Scoping studies: Advancing the methodology. Implement Science, 5(10), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-5-69

61.

Light

Ruebsaat

(2008). Keeping women safe: Eight critical components of an effective justice response to domestic violence. Critical Components Project Team. Government of British Columbia.

62.

Ludwig

S. R.

(1996). Abused women’s experience with the justice system: Concept mapping (Publication No. 193484835) [Doctoral dissertation]. University of Alberta; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

63.

Luke’s Place Support and Resource Centre for The Denise House. (2008). Needs assessment and gap analysis for abused women unrepresented in the family law system: Final report and recommendations. Government of Ontario, Ministry of the Attorney General.

64.

Lustman

L. D.

(2008). Hearing the voices of victims of domestic violence: Agency, no-contact orders , and no-drop prosecution (Publication No. 304401856) [Master’s thesis]. York University; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

65.

Macleod

Picard

(1989). Toward a more effective criminal justice response to wife assault: Exploring the limits and potential of effective intervention. Canadian Department of Justice Research Section. Canadian Research Index.

66.

MacQuarrie

(2005). Voices from the front lines: A report of the Middlesex county coordinating committee to end woman abuse and the London coordinating committee to end woman abuse. Centre for Research on Violence Against Women and Children, University of Western Ontario.

67.

McGillivray

Comaskey

(1999). Black eyes all of the time: Intimate violence, aboriginal women, and the justice system. University of Toronto Press.

68.

Miedema

(2004). Gendered silence: Immigrant women’s access to legal information about woman abuse. In M. Stirling, C. Cameron, N. Nason-Clark, B. Miedema, & N. Brown (Eds), Understanding abuse: Partnering for change (pp. 197–217). University of Toronto Press.

69.

Miedema

Wachholz

(1998). A complex web: Access to justice for abused immigrant women in New Brunswick. Government of Canada.

70.

Miedema

Wachholz

(1999). A complex web: Access to justice for abused immigrant women in new Brunswick. Canadian Woman Studies, 19(1/2), 175–181.

71.

Miedema, B. and Waccholz, S. (2004). Gendered silence: Immigrant women's access to legal information about woman abuse. In M. Stirling, C. Cameron, N. Nason-Clark & B. Miedema Understanding abuse: Partnering for change, pp. 197–217. University of Toronto Press.

72.

Minaker

J. C.

(1998). Women’s needs/available choices , juxtaposing criminal justice response to wife abuse with women’s words (Publication No. 304503127) [Master’s thesis). University of Winnipeg; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

73.

Minaker

J. C.

(2001). Evaluating criminal justice responses to intimate abuse through the lens of women’s needs. Canadian Journal of Women and the Law, 13(2), 74.

74.

Morris

(2008). Violence against women in Canada: Effective approaches and resources. MATCH International.

75.

Moser

A. E.

(2012) Validation and expansion of the Ontario domestic assault risk assessment (ODARA) instrument: An early warning system (Publication No. 1464391378) [Master’s thesis]. University of New Brunswick; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

76.

Nelund

(2015). Policy conflict: Women’s groups and institutionalized restorative justice. Criminal Justice Policy Review, 26(1), 65–84. https://doi.org/10.1177/0887403413509814

77.

Nova Scotia Criminal Justice Association. (2017). Criminal justice in Canada—Beyond a “one size fits all”. Proceedings of the Nova Scotia Criminal Justice Association Conference, Halifax, Nova Scotia.

78.

Nova Scotia Department of Justice Victims’ Services Division. (2001). A review of the effectiveness and viability of domestic violence interventions as an adjunct to the formal criminal justice system. Department of Justice, Nova Scotia.

79.

O’Neill

(2002a, July 8). A ‘dangerous’ weapon in the hands of police. Report Newsmagazine, 29, 32.

80.

O’Neill

(2002b, July 8). Lady justice gets back her blindfold: The B.C. government prepares to dump anti-male spousal-abuse polices. Report Newsmagazine, 29, 32–33.

81.

Pacey

K. E.

(2001). Policing beyond VAWIR policy: Criminal harassment pro arrest and the practice of discretionary power [Master’s thesis]. University of British Columbia. https://doi.org/10.14288/1.0089924

82.

Pais

(2016). Challenging the efficacy of no-drop prosecution policies in domestic violence cases: A comparative legal analysis [Doctoral dissertation]. , University of Queensland.

83.

Paterson

(2009). ( Re)constructing women’s resistance to woman abuse. Critical Social Policy, 29(1), 121–145. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261018308098397

84.

Paterson

S. L.

(2006). Rethinking wife abuse-violence, resistance, and public policy in Canada (Publication No. 304883616) [Doctoral dissertation]. Carleton University; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

85.

Perreault

Brennan

(2010). Criminal victimization in Canada, 2009. Juristat Article, 30(2), 1–33.

86.

Pigg

(2009a, August 28). Authorities ‘overreact’ as warring couples use zero-tolerance rule to gain upper hand, lawyer says. Toronto Star. http://ezproxy.library.dal.ca/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/439595308?accountid=10406

87.

Pigg

(2009b, October 3). Why fathers can’t catch a break; more than a decade after a landmark study recommended an overhaul of Canadian divorce law, courts still haven’t caught up to the new reality of Canadian family life. A generation of dads who can’t stand being apart from their children is pushing for change. Toronto Star. http://ezproxy.library.dal.ca/login?url=https://search.proquest.com/docview/439628452?accountid=10406

88.

Pollack

Green

Allspach

(2005). Women charged with domestic violence in Toronto: The unintended consequences of mandatory charge policies. Woman Abuse Council of Toronto.

89.

Riggs

(2011). The impacts of recent law reforms on abused women involved in the family court process in Ontario: An environmental scan of violence against women service providers. Luke’s Place Support and Resource Centre for Women and Children.

90.

Rossiter

Yercich

Jackson

(2014). Assessing the complexities and implications of anti-violence service delivery in British Columbia. The FREDA Centre for Research on Violence Against Women and Children. Simon Fraser University.

91.

Rubin

(2003). Restorative justice in Nova Scotia: Women’s experience and recommendations for positive policy development and implementation report and recommendations. National Association of Women and the Law.

92.

Rumscheidt

H. B.

(1996). The limits of law as a feminist response to social problems: A case study of police-charging policies in woman abuse cases (Publication No. 304277725) (Master’s thesis). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

93.

Russell

(2009). What women need now from police and prosecutors: 35 years of working to improve police response to male violence against women. Canadian Woman Studies, 28(1), 28–36.

94.

Russell

Light

(2006). Police and victim perspectives on empowerment of domestic violence victims. Police Quarterly, 9(4), 375–396. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098611104264495

95.

Scott

Augusta-Scott

Tutty

L. M.

(2017). Innovations in interventions to address intimate partner violence: Research and practice. Routledge.

96.

Seymour

S. L.

(1998). Law enforcement perceptions of domestic assault: An examination of sex role egalitarianism (Publication No. 304439937) [Master’s thesis]. University of Regina; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

97.

Singer

V. E.

(2012). Tensions in the dominant domestic violence discourse and the high risk case coordination protocol [Master’s thesis]. Dalhousie University.

98.

Singh

(2010). In between the system and the margins: Community organizations, mandatory charging and immigrant victims of abuse. Canadian Journal of Sociology 35(1), 31–62.

99.

Sinha, M. (2010) Family Violence in Canada: A Statistical Profile. Statistics Canada. http://www.statcan.gc.ca/pub/85-002-x/2012001/article/11643-eng.htm

100.

Tam

D. M. Y.

Dawson

Jackson

Kwok

S. M.

Thurston

W. E.

(2013). Comparing criminal justice responses to violence against women in Canada and China. Asia Pacific Journal of Social Work and Development, 23(2), 106–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/02185385.2013.793020

101.

Thandi

Lloyd

(2011). “This is a man's problem”: Strategies for working with South Asian male perpetrators of intimate partner violence. Justice Institute of British Columbia.

102.

Tutty

L. M.

Giurgu

Weaver-Dunlop

Traya

Christensen

(2010). Promising practices to engage ethno-cultural communities in ending domestic violence. RESOLVE Alberta.

103.

Tutty

L. M.

Goard

(2002). Reclaiming self: Issues and resources for women abused by intimate partners. Fernwood Publishing.

104.

Tutty

L. M.

Koshan

Jesso

Ogden

Warrell

J. G.

(2011). Evaluation of the Calgary specialized domestic violence trial court and monitoring the first appearance court: Final report. RESOLVE Alberta.

105.

Tutty

L. M.

Wylie

Abbot

Mackenzie

Ursel

Koshan

(2008). The justice response to domestic violence: A literature review. RESOLVE Alberta.

106.

Ursel

E. J.

(2001). Report on domestic violence policies and their impact on aboriginal people. RESOLVE Manitoba. Aboriginal Justice Implementation Commission.

107.

Ursel

(1998). Mandatory charging: The Manitoba model. In K. Bonnycastle & G. Rigakos (Eds), Unsettling truths: Battered women, policy, politics, and contemporary research in Canada (pp. 73–81). Collective Press.

108.

Van De Sande

(1998). Restorative justice alternatives and the question of applicability to family- addressing the issue of domestic violence (Publication No. 304543330) [Master’s thesis]. Dalhousie University; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

109.

Wachholz

Miedema

(2000). Risk, fear, harm: Immigrant women’s perceptions of the “policing solution” to woman abuse. Crime, Law and Social Change, 34(3), 301–317. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008358432117

110.

Wilson

H. E.

(1998). Victim’s attitudes and perceptions of the pro-arrest policy (Publication No. 08989095) (Master’s thesis). Dalhousie University; Gender Studies Database.

111.

Wisniewski

(2016). Rural realities faced by service providers and women survivors of intimate partner violence when navigating the justice system. Muriel McQueen Fergusson Centre for Family Violence Research.

112.

Wood

L. P.

(2001). Caught in the net of zero-tolerance, the effect of the criminal justice response to partner violence (Publication No. 304732956) [Master’s thesis]. University of Manitoba; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

113.

Zellerer

(1996). Violence against Inuit women in the Canadian eastern arctic (Publication No. 89243351) [Doctoral dissertation]. Simon Fraser University; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.