No right to choose: mandated victim participation in domestic violence prosecutions

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/15963

Record ID: b30be947-427a-424c-84f3-224b666ac578

Full metadata record

DC Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Hanna, Cheryl	en
dc.date.accessioned	2022-06-30T23:22:44Z	-
dc.date.available	2022-06-30T23:22:44Z	-
dc.date.issued	1996	en
dc.identifier.citation	109 (3), May 1996	en
dc.identifier.issn	0017811X	en
dc.identifier.uri	https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/15963	-
dc.language	en	en
dc.publisher	Harvard Law Review Association	en
dc.subject	Legal issues	en
dc.subject	Criminal justice responses	en
dc.subject	Theories of violence	en
dc.title	No right to choose: mandated victim participation in domestic violence prosecutions	en
dc.title.alternative	Harvard law review	en
dc.type	Journal Article	en
dc.identifier.catalogid	2320	en
dc.subject.keyword	new_record	en
dc.subject.keyword	Journal article/research paper	en
dc.subject.keyword	International	en
dc.description.notes	Examines the tensions between state accountability, perpetrator responsibility and victims' autonomy which arise due to mandated victim participation in domestic violence prosecutions in the US. The current debate surrounding no-drop policies and mandated participation, theoretical dilemmas posed by the public/private, particular/general and agency/victim dichotomies and accepting the costs of mandated participation as part of an overall systematic response to violence are discussed. Includes suggestions to prosecutors for increasing the power and autonomy of mandated victims.	en
dc.identifier.source	Harvard law review	en
dc.date.entered	2001-03-01	en
Appears in Collections:	Journal Articles

Files in This Item:

There are no files associated with this item.

Who's citing