Evaluating the Effectiveness of Protective Orders in the U.S.

William Kaklis

Background 

            Protective orders have long been utilized by the court system to address many different relationship issues. Protective orders may contain a variety of provisions, from no contact provisions, which affords a survivor a chance to be free from contact with their abuser, to firearms provisions, which prevent the alleged abuser from obtaining or possessing firearms. All protective orders have one goal in mind in protecting survivors of physical and/or emotional abuse and preventing further escalation. For the millions of survivors who experience domestic abuse, a protective order offers peace of mind. The stakes are high, from 1980 to 2008, around one out of every five murder victims were killed by an intimate partner.[i] As critical as these orders are, it is important to continually evaluate their effectiveness in preventing further violence.

 

Violations

            First, it is important to note there are numerous studies on the effectiveness of protective orders, some of which produce conflicting evidence. When evaluating the effectiveness of an order, it is important to consider the specific nature of the violation.[ii] In many instances, the mere issuance of a protective order makes the survivor of abuse feel safer. A study involving 698 survivors across multiple jurisdictions found that only 9 percent of women dropped the protective order.[iii] Reported rates of violation of a protection order vary from 7.1 percent on the low end to as high as 81.3 percent.[iv] This large variation in findings can be explained by studies that lack a control group, and some involve very small sample sizes. One study that involved a large sample size found that having a permanent protection order was associated with an 80 percent reduction in police-reported physical violence in the next year.[v] Further, women with permanent protection orders were significantly less likely to be physically abused than those without them.[vi]

Risk Factors

Courts should be wary of specific risk factors which may result in a violation. Stalking is a major risk factor for potential violations. One study found that 30 percent of women reported being stalked after the issuance of a protective order.[vii] Further, being stalked after the order was issued was associated with an increase in other types of violence.[viii] Relationship status is another risk factor, as 68 percent of survivors who continued their relationship with the partner listed on the order reported violations, compared with 53 percent for survivors who did not continue their relationship.[ix] Race is another risk factor. Black women experience an increased risk of renewed abuse following legal intervention, in the form of a protective order or an arrest of partner for domestic violence.[x] When it comes to violations, time is of the essence, as most violations of protective orders occur within three months after the issuance of the order.[xi] Other factors include whether the abuser was arrested following the incident that led to the issuance of an order, and whether the abuser has a violent or criminal history.[xii]

Conclusion

            How effective are protection orders at preventing further violence/harassment? It is a difficult question to answer that depends on what is considered effective. Although most survivors feel safer once an order is in place, this doesn’t guarantee they will not experience abuse after the order is issued. Based on the data we have; it is fair to conclude that protective orders are at least somewhat effective at preventing escalating violence. But with millions of Americans suffering from domestic abuse every year, not all situations are the same, and in some cases protective orders may not be effective. When it comes to certain risk factors, especially stalking, more aggressive action, such as brining criminal charges, may be necessary to prevent further escalation. It is also important to note that black women are at an increased risk of renewed abuse. Evaluating the effectiveness of protective orders will get easier as more research is conducted, in a more uniform manner than is current practice. In the meantime, courts may achieve more desirable outcomes if they carefully tailor protective orders to the specific facts of each individual case.

 

 

Citations

[i] Alexia Cooper & Erica L. Smith, Homicide Trends in the United States, Bureau of Justice Statistics, November 2011, at 20.

[ii] Christopher T. Benitez, Dale E. McNiel & Renée L. Binder, Do Protection Orders Protect?, The Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, September 2010, vol. 38, at 376–385.

[iii] TK Logan & Robert Walker, Civil Protective Order Outcomes, Journal of Interpersonal Violence, May 2008, at 1,2.

 

[iv]  E.g., BENITEZ ET AL., supra note 2, at 381.

 

[v]  Id. at 381.

 

[vi] Id. at 381.

 

[vii] E.g., LOGAN & WALKER, supra note 3, at 10.

 

[viii] Id. at 10.

 

[ix] Id. at 10.

 

[x] E.g., BENITEZ ET AL., supra note 2, at 383.

 

[xi] Id. at 382.

 

[xii] Id. at 381-384.