因男性暴力而惩罚母亲:未能保护立法和对受虐妇女的刑事定罪。

IF 2 3区 社会学 Q1 LAW Feminist Legal Studies Pub Date : 2021-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-05-05 DOI:10.1007/s10691-021-09455-5
Sarah Singh
{"title":"因男性暴力而惩罚母亲:未能保护立法和对受虐妇女的刑事定罪。","authors":"Sarah Singh","doi":"10.1007/s10691-021-09455-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article explores the gender dynamics of 'causing or allowing a child to die', contrary to the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004, section 5. This offence was intended to allow for prosecution where a child had been killed and it was uncertain who had killed him/her, but also to allow for prosecution of non-violent defendants who failed to protect him/her. More women than men have been charged and convicted of this offence signifying a reversal of usual patterns of prosecution and conviction. This analysis interrogates how section 5 criminalises women who have experienced domestic abuse. Drawing on a case observation, reported cases and media reports of cases, I suggest this offence derives from and perpetuates patriarchal constructs of motherhood. Grounded in a feminist approach building on women's concrete experiences of law, I conclude that section 5 should be amended so that it is only used where it cannot be ascertained which defendant actively harmed a child.</p>","PeriodicalId":45822,"journal":{"name":"Feminist Legal Studies","volume":"29 2","pages":"181-204"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10691-021-09455-5","citationCount":"6","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Punishing Mothers for Men's Violence: Failure to Protect Legislation and the Criminalisation of Abused Women.\",\"authors\":\"Sarah Singh\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10691-021-09455-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This article explores the gender dynamics of 'causing or allowing a child to die', contrary to the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004, section 5. This offence was intended to allow for prosecution where a child had been killed and it was uncertain who had killed him/her, but also to allow for prosecution of non-violent defendants who failed to protect him/her. More women than men have been charged and convicted of this offence signifying a reversal of usual patterns of prosecution and conviction. This analysis interrogates how section 5 criminalises women who have experienced domestic abuse. Drawing on a case observation, reported cases and media reports of cases, I suggest this offence derives from and perpetuates patriarchal constructs of motherhood. Grounded in a feminist approach building on women's concrete experiences of law, I conclude that section 5 should be amended so that it is only used where it cannot be ascertained which defendant actively harmed a child.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45822,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Feminist Legal Studies\",\"volume\":\"29 2\",\"pages\":\"181-204\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1007/s10691-021-09455-5\",\"citationCount\":\"6\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Feminist Legal Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-021-09455-5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/5/5 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Feminist Legal Studies","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-021-09455-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/5/5 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

摘要

本文探讨了“导致或允许儿童死亡”的性别动态,违反了2004年《家庭暴力、犯罪和受害者法》第5节。这一罪行的目的是允许在儿童被杀害而不确定是谁杀害他/她的情况下进行起诉,但也允许起诉未能保护他/她的非暴力被告。因这一罪行被起诉和定罪的妇女多于男子,这表明通常的起诉和定罪模式发生了逆转。这一分析质疑了第5条是如何将遭受家庭暴力的妇女定为犯罪的。根据对案例的观察、报告的案例和媒体对案例的报道,我认为这种罪行源于并延续了母性的父权结构。基于基于女性具体法律经验的女权主义方法,我得出结论,第5条应该修改,以便仅在无法确定被告主动伤害儿童的情况下使用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Punishing Mothers for Men's Violence: Failure to Protect Legislation and the Criminalisation of Abused Women.

This article explores the gender dynamics of 'causing or allowing a child to die', contrary to the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004, section 5. This offence was intended to allow for prosecution where a child had been killed and it was uncertain who had killed him/her, but also to allow for prosecution of non-violent defendants who failed to protect him/her. More women than men have been charged and convicted of this offence signifying a reversal of usual patterns of prosecution and conviction. This analysis interrogates how section 5 criminalises women who have experienced domestic abuse. Drawing on a case observation, reported cases and media reports of cases, I suggest this offence derives from and perpetuates patriarchal constructs of motherhood. Grounded in a feminist approach building on women's concrete experiences of law, I conclude that section 5 should be amended so that it is only used where it cannot be ascertained which defendant actively harmed a child.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
20
期刊介绍: Feminist Legal Studies is committed to an internationalist perspective and to the promotion and advancement of feminist scholarship in all areas of law. It aims to publish critical, interdisciplinary, theoretically engaged feminist scholarship relating to law (broadly conceived) and has a particular interest in work that extends feminist debates and analysis by reference to critical and theoretical approaches and perspectives, including postcolonial, transnational and poststructuralist work.  Although the focus of the journal is law, the editorial board encourages the submission of papers from people working outside the academy, as well as academics other than lawyers as well as interdisciplinary work addressing the concerns not only of lawyers but others, women and men, interested in feminist work. The editorial board is a collective drawn from feminists working at leading law schools across the UK. A full list of the editorial board can found on the Journal’s website: http://www.springer.com/law/international/journal/10691?detailsPage=editorialBoardAlongside traditional articles and book reviews Feminist Legal Studies is committed to publishing material that challenges conventional forms of academic writing/knowledge and encourages creative approaches to scholarship, analysis and debate. Such material is normally published in our “Creative Content” section (see Instructions for Authors for more details). The board also welcomes proposals for themed issues of the journal.
期刊最新文献
Labour Law’s (Mis)Management of Menopausal Workers Those Lucky Enough to Transcend Gender: Travis Alabanza, Radical Transfeminism, and the Law Gender-Based Violence and Carceral Feminism in Australia: Towards Decarceral Approaches Separate But Equal: Is Segregated Schooling (Still) Good for Girls? The Art of Waiting Humbly: Women Judges Reflect on Vertical Gender Segregation.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1