Sorry all for being Missing in Action.

this was an essay I just finished less than a minute ago. It’s not the greatest, and I’m not the greatest writer, but hell, it’s worth quite a bit in my intro to psych course and I didn’t want to do another “Womenz are teh victims lol!!one11!1!”

So I’ll put it under the cut! (unfortunately it’s not as long as it should be, so sorry for the short read).

According to many different Women’s programs, 95% of victims of spousal abuse are women. Websites such as WRAP, claim 4 million women a year are assaulted, 20% of women in relationships are battered and two thirds of all marriages will experience domestic violence at some point (WRAP). A popular theory is Battered Woman Syndrome; where a women is abused to such an extent that she kills her spouse. Unfortunately, what is not widely known, is that in 1994, the Department of Justice released statistics claiming that in spousal abuse, 41% of women were the murderer; numbers nearly equal to male on female murder in an abusive relationship (Department of Justice, 1994). A question posed then; Is battered Woman syndrome relevant for legal and psychological purposes if women against male violence/murder is nearly equal? Is a battered woman’s psychology so different that it warrants a separate psychological term that may be used in court? To draw up a theory, we must understand what battered woman syndrome truly is.

The term “battered woman syndrome” original is based off of “battered person’s syndrome”, ICD-9, 995.81 in the DSM IV. It is also referred to as a Post Traumatic Stress disorder, and falls under the Adult abuse, Injury and Poisoning category. However, when referenced from the ICD-9-CM database, the definition of battered person’s syndrome is:

“Women who are physically and mentally abused over an extended period, usually by a husband or other dominant male figure. Characteristics of the battered woman syndrome are helplessness, constant fear, and a perceived inability to escape.”

It is unclear if 995.81 is Battered Person’s Syndrome or Battered woman Syndrome; Both are different applied theories and should not be confused with each other. The Wikipedia definition, as untrustworthy the source, differs greatly:

“In lay terms, this is a reference to any person who, because of constant and severe domestic violence usually involving physical abuse by a partner, becomes depressed and unable to take any independent action that would allow him or her to escape the abuse.”

The DSM IV unwittingly has mistaken battered woman syndrome with battered person’s syndrome. The latter is gender neutral, with both man or woman being susceptible to being subjected to it; the former is only applicable to females in relationships and is based off of combined theories. “Battered woman syndrome” was coined by a Feminist Psychologist, Lenore Walker, in 1978-1982 (Walker, 1979). It is based off of Martin Seligman’s theory of Learned helplessness, where Lenore links the dog’s inability to escape their situation into battered women, as they display the same characteristics. She claimed that abuse has three stages of violence; First, the Tension building stage where there are verbal or minor physical abuse the victim attempts to pacify. The next is Acute Battering incident, where real or perceived danger is at it’s highest. Finally, there is the Loving contrition stage, where the abuser’s attitude changes after the abuse; sometimes they will apologize and promise it will never happen again. The first complication that arises is that in her cycle of violence, there is no indication or reasoning for the killing of the husband; it only outlines the violence in the male, not the defense in the female. Secondly, when it is based on such theories such as Learned Helplessness, contradictions arise.

 

When all components that create the Battered woman syndrome are analyzed in depth, complications arise. The most prominent one is that it was based off of Seligman’s Learned Helplessness theory , in which the victim does not attempt to escape abuse. However, in Seligman’s experiment, of the 150 dogs tested, 50 of them were “…completely normal and learned to avoid shock in the avoidance test.”(Dr. C.A.P. Kenyon, 1994) Therefor, if it were able to translate to human psychology, one third of all battered wives will escape the abusive relationship or attempt. However, It is unclear whether Walker is referencing the two thirds who become helpless are women who fight back and injure or kill their husband, or if it’s the one third that escape the abuse despite past experiences. Secondly, Learned Helplessness does not factor in aggression. In Seligman’s experiments, there is no notable aggression that is shown or recorded. The results were that the animals did not try to escape, or attempted to escape. Some showed signs of clinical depression while others continued to behave “normally”. Since Battered woman Syndrome is partially based off of Learned helplessness, there is notably some criticism regarding a pacifist theory supporting one where the victim commits murder.

Another complication that rises is that it was never tested rigorously by Walker to disprove any criticisms it received. Her study, outlined in “The Battered Woman”, reveals that she only tested 345, Caucasian, heterosexual women who all came from the same background (Walker, 1979). No variations in race, history, or background were used in her study. Indeed, her experiments have also never been recreated, posing the question of is it merely a social/cultural phenomenon, or is it a condition women from diverse backgrounds suffer? Another problem is that the medical world cannot decide at what point of abuse does a person fight back, let alone kill their abuser. This creates even more vagueness to the term, and needs to be clarified and tested further for it be effective as a psychological disorder, used in court to defend or prosecute a woman. Although the theory has not been tested rigorously yet, it appears in tv shows to movies to music.

In popular media, Battered woman syndrome has found it’s place. In India, there is a famous movie named “Provoked” that was made in India, and released in the UK in 2006. From internet movie database (imdb.com), the plot outline is:

 

“It’s the true story of a Punjabi woman named Kiranjit Ahluwalia who leaves India to marry a London-based guy, only to be badly abused. She ends up in prison for murdering her abusive husband. “

 

However, news stories and several different articles prove otherwise. This Hollywood version has twisted the reality. Kiranjit Ahluwalia arrived in Britain in 1979 in a second arranged marriage. After having 2 sons born out of what she claimed was constant rape, she testified that he abused her to a point where she took petrol, doused him in it while he slept, and then lit it. He died 5 days later in hospital. She was originally jailed for life for murder; However, later, she was let out on a lesser charge using the battered woman syndrome to support her case (She was let out on Manslaughter). The main issue with this case is that it may spur more lesser charges based on Battered woman syndrome, when the term itself is not adequately defined, and when the evidence was presented after the fact (DailyMail, 2006).

 

“”I couldn’t see an end to the violence,” she says. “I decided to burn him back; show him how much it hurt.”

 

Taking this quote, it is unclear whether she means to say that she wanted him to feel the pain of the abuse, or if she was seeking revenge. It was later clear that she had not suffered a disorder or mental illness;

 

“Her original defence of provocation had failed partly because the jury was told she was not suffering from a mental disorder. But her new solicitor, Rohit Sanghvi, found new evidence that she had been suffering from ‘battered wives syndrome’.”

 

The “new evidence” was displayed after the first trial where she was sentenced to life in prison. This causes legal technicalities that should have been dealt with in the original case. She is even quoted to say later in the article:

 

“”A lot of people think the book and film have made me rich but that isn’t the case,” Kiranjit says. “I still need to work.””

 

According to the courts, she suffered no mental illness, and that she was guilty of murder. The story also seems inconsistent, her quotes ranging from “I decided to burn him back” to “I felt so guilty. I cried and cried.” It is also concerning to have her note about her financial status of money gained off of the murder. It is unclear whether she had killed him in self defense while he slept, or if she had killed him for other motives. An abused person should always get the help they need, but there needs to be a way to confirm it. It must also be treated with absolute fairness in sentences compared to their male counterparts.

According to “Forensic Nurse”, a site dedicated to investigations of violence and medical issues, women are charged with lesser sentences for the same crimes;

 

“Many reports of U.S. criminal sentencing demonstrate that wives who kill their husbands are acquitted in 12.9 percent of cases, while husbands who kill their wives are acquitted in only 1.4 percent of cases. Additionally, a 1988 U.S. Justice Department study found men frequently receive an average sentence of 17 years for killing their spouses, vs. a six-year sentence for the woman who kills her husband. Probation for female spousal killers is granted to approximately 16 percent, while only 1.6 percent for males may be granted probation.”

Women are often let out of jail, and acquitted of murder more often then their male counterparts for the exact same crimes. This shows that there is a natural biased towards women concerning emotionally charged crimes, such as the killing of an intimate partner. In May 1996, the Department of Justice did a report concerning the validity of using Battered woman syndrome in the courtroom, collaborating with both the Department of Health and Human services, and Judges. This report suggests that the term Battered woman syndrome is not a construct adequate enough to describe battering in legal cases, and that on an individual case by case, the term implies far too much; that the woman is helpless and the victim. They even claim that there needs to be more research “of battering and its effects are relevant to these legal circumstances…”(pg.viii) Battered woman syndrome needs to be further investigated for the sake of legal technicalities;

“A substantial number of state courts have also admitted expert testimony in nontraditional self-defense situations (e.g., when a battered woman kills her batterer when he is asleep or hires a third party to kill him)” (pg.viiii)

In any case where a woman claims battered woman syndrome, there needs to be evaluation done on her to ensure that she had killed him in self defense, and not use battered woman syndrome as an excuse to commit a murder.

Through the analysis of the supporting theories of Learned Helplessness and Battered persons syndrome, combined with legal jargon, Battered woman syndrome is nothing more than an attempt of explaining why women kill their husbands. Considering almost half of murdered spouses are killed by women, a fair treatment must be used to ensure that both genders get the psychiatric diagnosis and help to ensure that a syndrome is not used as a legal scapegoat. Both men and women need to be recognized fairly, and that if there are differences in the psychological make up of an abused adult, it needs to be documented much more carefully than casual interviews and reports. The mental health of the patients are the key interest, however, in cases where murder is involved, there must be safeguards for the victim and against the abuser so; Abuse will not continue, and the victim will get psychological help in order to heal the scars brought on by abuse. A syndrome should never be used as an excuse for murder, and more so, it should be punished in the eyes of the law equally. As a feminist like Walker would say, men and women are equal and therefor should be treated as such.