Persuasive/Argumentative Research Paper (Draft 2)
Battered Women Syndrome
A bruise here, a cut there; definitely not attractive features but ones that draw attention to their reason of existing. Some make an extra effort to roll up their sleeve to reveal the swollen blob that occupies their arm, sparking questions as to how they received the gruesome mark. They proceed to proudly tell the tale of its coming, demonstrating their strength and roughness to anyone who will lend an ear to listen. Maybe they became tangled in a bar fight or took a tumble while playing their favorite sport. But what about the ones that make an extra effort to pull down the sleeve; self conscious beyond belief of the physical wound that has penetrated not just the skin, but the mind as well? What about the ones that duck their head away into shadows to conceal the muddy coloring applied to their face like makeup but with a force like no other? The constant beatings have driven some individuals to murder their abuser (commonly a relationship partner) out of desperation for the halt of the abuse. This situation has become common with abused women and intermingles with the condition of Battered Women Syndrome. In the case of self-defense, women who kill their abusive partners should be eligible for lead way during their trial in order to help minimize the amount of abuse they and others will have to experience in the future.
In one of the most extreme cases of abusive relationships, the abused partner has been driven to murder out of self defense or through the need for revenge. Although the subject is not weighted for or against either gender, women have been a highlighted focus for quite some time. Battered women syndrome is a diagnosed condition in which women that have been continuously beaten by their male partners eventually snap and kill their abusers. The question is, should the killers be fully punished for the crime or should their mental stability be taken into account when they appear for trial? One side of this controversy is structured on the base that murder is murder and when committed, the proper punishment must be implemented. Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, who criticized battered woman syndrome in his 1994 book, "The Abuse Excuse," said there are a limited number of cases where the syndrome is valid. But he said it is overused. Lenore Walker, a psychologist who is credited with coining the term "battered woman syndrome" in 1977, recalled that in one of the first cases she worked on, the prosecutor argued that allowing her to testify about battered woman syndrome would mean an "open season on killing men." Also, Bill Saban, the retired prosecutor in a battered women case, said he recognizes self-defense as valid, but he said he "can't buy into" past abuse as justification, "because it can excuse almost any killing."
When one takes the life of another, planned or out of self-defense, there is no question that a murder was committed and that a punishment must be sentenced. It can be agreed that those in abusive relationships are not fully psychologically stable and that the decisions they make may not have been fully thought through. For this reason it is essential that the varying situations be taken into account when ruling over any of the cases before determining the conviction.
It is obvious by studying the plethora of court cases that have taken place since the birth of the United States judicial system that almost every
case is circumstantial and many factors contribute to the conviction the accused will receive. In the instance of self-defense, women who kill their abusive partners should be eligible for an altered conviction. An ideal example is of Paul Lancaster and his wife Dr. Ann Gybroski. Gybroski shot her husband twice as he came after her when she tried to settle a dispute between him and their son Christopher. 25 year old Christopher was questioning Paul as to why his mother had a black eye and swollen face (both of which she had received the night before from her husband as she was driving). According to Gybroski’s attorney,Kevin Reddington, “The bruises speak volumes about what happened. She did what she had to do to protect herself and her children.” Reddington plans to argue self-defense using the battered women syndrome. There are many reasons that women remain withtheir partners and endure the constant beatings inflicted upon them. They might not have a stable financial system to support themselves if they were to leave and if children are involved they might want to stay for the children’s sake. Also, some may have sought out help from courts for restraining orders, but there is only so much that is done to enforce those orders.
A survivor story told by Diane Wetendorf exemplifies just this. A woman described how her marriage took a toll on her when her husband began abusing and isolating her from family and friends. He was always drunk and although seldom sober, he abused his wife so that people would never discover her scars. Because of her multiple broken ribs and swelling bruises, she grew accustomed to wearing turtle necks and long sleeved shirts year round to hide the evidence. She filed for divorce, got an Order of Protection and he still stalked and vandalized her and her belongings.
The fear the women must feel of what awaits them behind closed doors and in the isolated home where no one is around to rush to their aid is enough to prevent most from seeking help and assistance. Many feel a connection to their partner and have the mental ideal that their partner won’t hurt them again and that they are genuinely apologetic, despite their partner’s repeated abuse. The situations are endless of why women don’t escape the relationship that puts them through such drastic conditions and if the only way they feel safe is if their partner doesn’t exist, then something needs to be done. Granted, no one can regulate each and every household or what plays out behind the scenes. However, things can be done in court to make women slightly more confident in protecting themselves. In 1994, the United States passed the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). This act provides police IPV sensitivity trainings, as well as legal services such as issuing restraining orders and representing victims. VAWA provided momentum for states to adopt mandatory arrest laws governing cases in which police suspect domestic violence, based upon evidence and probable cause. These laws now exist in 22 states and the District of Columbia. VAWA also funds special courts to administer not equal justice but feminist justice: ideological justice reminiscent of the French Revolution's political tribunals or Hitler's dreaded "people's courts." Some 300 "integrated domestic violence courts" now operate nationwide.
In cases where the woman plans to kill her abuser and where she mentally and physically prepares to do so, the case should be taken as a full murder and followed with such appropriate convictions. Also, if the beatings have been going on for some time, the woman could have had opportunities to get help for her mental state and advice on the situation. If this help is not sought and they choose to solve the situation by
eliminating the abuser, then they should not receive an altered conviction. Deborah Jo Welch is a 49 year old woman who is currently serving time for killing her husband. She shot him eight times in the back when he tried to drag her out of their car while beating her as he had done numerous times beforehand. Although in this instance, one might view it as self-defense, however, Deborah had a past of escaping her husband but returning after a short time period because she thought she could “change him.” She did not have any support when it came to her trial and it hurt her even more when her records showed her shooting a bullet over her husband’s head and injuring another individual.
In a controversial topic such as this, it is difficult to firmly side one way or the other since situations constantly vary from one to another. Therefore, I propose a compromise. In the cases where self-defense was the reason for the murder, the punishment should be downgraded appropriately by the court. In cases where the woman has planned out her moves and constructed the act thoroughly beforehand, it should be considered a murder trial and the conviction should not be altered based on her motives.
A bruise here, a cut there; definitely not attractive features but ones that draw attention to their reason of existing. Some make an extra effort to roll up their sleeve to reveal the swollen blob that occupies their arm, sparking questions as to how they received the gruesome mark. They proceed to proudly tell the tale of its coming, demonstrating their strength and roughness to anyone who will lend an ear to listen. Maybe they became tangled in a bar fight or took a tumble while playing their favorite sport. But what about the ones that make an extra effort to pull down the sleeve; self conscious beyond belief of the physical wound that has penetrated not just the skin, but the mind as well? What about the ones that duck their head away into shadows to conceal the muddy coloring applied to their face like makeup but with a force like no other? The constant beatings have driven some individuals to murder their abuser (commonly a relationship partner) out of desperation for the halt of the abuse. This situation has become common with abused women and intermingles with the condition of Battered Women Syndrome. In the case of self-defense, women who kill their abusive partners should be eligible for lead way during their trial in order to help minimize the amount of abuse they and others will have to experience in the future.
In one of the most extreme cases of abusive relationships, the abused partner has been driven to murder out of self defense or through the need for revenge. Although the subject is not weighted for or against either gender, women have been a highlighted focus for quite some time. Battered women syndrome is a diagnosed condition in which women that have been continuously beaten by their male partners eventually snap and kill their abusers. The question is, should the killers be fully punished for the crime or should their mental stability be taken into account when they appear for trial? One side of this controversy is structured on the base that murder is murder and when committed, the proper punishment must be implemented. Harvard law professor Alan Dershowitz, who criticized battered woman syndrome in his 1994 book, "The Abuse Excuse," said there are a limited number of cases where the syndrome is valid. But he said it is overused. Lenore Walker, a psychologist who is credited with coining the term "battered woman syndrome" in 1977, recalled that in one of the first cases she worked on, the prosecutor argued that allowing her to testify about battered woman syndrome would mean an "open season on killing men." Also, Bill Saban, the retired prosecutor in a battered women case, said he recognizes self-defense as valid, but he said he "can't buy into" past abuse as justification, "because it can excuse almost any killing."
When one takes the life of another, planned or out of self-defense, there is no question that a murder was committed and that a punishment must be sentenced. It can be agreed that those in abusive relationships are not fully psychologically stable and that the decisions they make may not have been fully thought through. For this reason it is essential that the varying situations be taken into account when ruling over any of the cases before determining the conviction.
It is obvious by studying the plethora of court cases that have taken place since the birth of the United States judicial system that almost every
case is circumstantial and many factors contribute to the conviction the accused will receive. In the instance of self-defense, women who kill their abusive partners should be eligible for an altered conviction. An ideal example is of Paul Lancaster and his wife Dr. Ann Gybroski. Gybroski shot her husband twice as he came after her when she tried to settle a dispute between him and their son Christopher. 25 year old Christopher was questioning Paul as to why his mother had a black eye and swollen face (both of which she had received the night before from her husband as she was driving). According to Gybroski’s attorney,Kevin Reddington, “The bruises speak volumes about what happened. She did what she had to do to protect herself and her children.” Reddington plans to argue self-defense using the battered women syndrome. There are many reasons that women remain withtheir partners and endure the constant beatings inflicted upon them. They might not have a stable financial system to support themselves if they were to leave and if children are involved they might want to stay for the children’s sake. Also, some may have sought out help from courts for restraining orders, but there is only so much that is done to enforce those orders.
A survivor story told by Diane Wetendorf exemplifies just this. A woman described how her marriage took a toll on her when her husband began abusing and isolating her from family and friends. He was always drunk and although seldom sober, he abused his wife so that people would never discover her scars. Because of her multiple broken ribs and swelling bruises, she grew accustomed to wearing turtle necks and long sleeved shirts year round to hide the evidence. She filed for divorce, got an Order of Protection and he still stalked and vandalized her and her belongings.
The fear the women must feel of what awaits them behind closed doors and in the isolated home where no one is around to rush to their aid is enough to prevent most from seeking help and assistance. Many feel a connection to their partner and have the mental ideal that their partner won’t hurt them again and that they are genuinely apologetic, despite their partner’s repeated abuse. The situations are endless of why women don’t escape the relationship that puts them through such drastic conditions and if the only way they feel safe is if their partner doesn’t exist, then something needs to be done. Granted, no one can regulate each and every household or what plays out behind the scenes. However, things can be done in court to make women slightly more confident in protecting themselves. In 1994, the United States passed the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). This act provides police IPV sensitivity trainings, as well as legal services such as issuing restraining orders and representing victims. VAWA provided momentum for states to adopt mandatory arrest laws governing cases in which police suspect domestic violence, based upon evidence and probable cause. These laws now exist in 22 states and the District of Columbia. VAWA also funds special courts to administer not equal justice but feminist justice: ideological justice reminiscent of the French Revolution's political tribunals or Hitler's dreaded "people's courts." Some 300 "integrated domestic violence courts" now operate nationwide.
In cases where the woman plans to kill her abuser and where she mentally and physically prepares to do so, the case should be taken as a full murder and followed with such appropriate convictions. Also, if the beatings have been going on for some time, the woman could have had opportunities to get help for her mental state and advice on the situation. If this help is not sought and they choose to solve the situation by
eliminating the abuser, then they should not receive an altered conviction. Deborah Jo Welch is a 49 year old woman who is currently serving time for killing her husband. She shot him eight times in the back when he tried to drag her out of their car while beating her as he had done numerous times beforehand. Although in this instance, one might view it as self-defense, however, Deborah had a past of escaping her husband but returning after a short time period because she thought she could “change him.” She did not have any support when it came to her trial and it hurt her even more when her records showed her shooting a bullet over her husband’s head and injuring another individual.
In a controversial topic such as this, it is difficult to firmly side one way or the other since situations constantly vary from one to another. Therefore, I propose a compromise. In the cases where self-defense was the reason for the murder, the punishment should be downgraded appropriately by the court. In cases where the woman has planned out her moves and constructed the act thoroughly beforehand, it should be considered a murder trial and the conviction should not be altered based on her motives.