Australian Institute of Criminology

Skip to content

References

All URLs correct at June 2012

  • ACT Community Law Reform Committee (CLRC) 1995. Domestic violence. The Community Law Reform Committee of the Australian Capital Territory report no. 9. Canberra: Attorney-General’s Department
  • ACT Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) 2008. Annual report 2007–2008. http://www.dpp.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/237255/AR2007_2008.pdf
  • ACT Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) 2007. Annual report 2006–2007. http://www.dpp.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/237253/AR2006_2007.pdf
  • ACT Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) 2006. Annual report 2005–2006. http://www.dpp.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/237252/AR2005_2006.pdf
  • Andrews D & Bonta J 2004. The psychology of criminal conduct, 3rd ed. Cincinnati, OH: Anderson Publishing
  • Australian Institute of Criminology (AIC) 2009. Good governance for effective crime prevention. AICrime Reduction Matters no. 76. Canberra: AIC. http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/crm/61-80/crm076.aspx
  • Babcock J, Green C & Robbie C 2004. Does batterers’ treatment work?: A meta-analytic review of domestic violence treatment outcome research. Clinical Psychology Review 23: 1023–1053
  • Bazemore G 1997. The ‘community’ in community justice: Issues, themes, and questions for the new neighbourhood sanctioning models. The Justice System Journal 19(2): 193–227
  • Benevolent Society 2009. Moving forward: Women’s journeys after leaving an abusive relationship. Paddington: Benevolent Society
  • Berman G & Feinblatt J 2001. Problem-solving courts: A brief primer. Journal of Law & Public Policy 23(2): 125–139
  • Blagg H 2008. Problem-orientated courts. Perth: Law Reform Commission of Western Australia
  • Braaf R & Gilbert R 2007. Domestic violence incident peaks: Seasonal factors, calendar events and sporting matches. Stakeholder paper 2. Sydney: Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse
  • Braithwaite J & Strang H 2002. Restorative justice and family violence, in Strang H & Braithwaite J (eds), Restorative justice and family violence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press: 1–22
  • Brown M 2000. Calculations of risk in contemporary penal practice, in Brown M & Pratt J (eds), Dangerous offenders: Punishment and social order. London: Routledge: 93–107
  • Buzawa E & Hirschel D 2009. Evolution of the police response to domestic violence, in Stark E & Buzawa E (eds), Violence against women in families and relationships volume 3: Criminal Justice and the Law. Santa Barbara: Praeger Publishing: 69–89
  • Carrington K & Phillips J 2006. Domestic violence in Australia—An overview of the issues. Parliamentary Library E-Brief. http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/Publications_Archive/archive/Domviolence
  • Carson D 2003. Therapeutic jurisprudence and adversarial injustice: Questioning limits. Western Criminology Review 4(2): 124–133
  • Chung D, O’Leary P & Zannettinno L 2004. National comparative assessment of programs for men who are violent towards their female partners. Canberra: Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet
  • Clement K, Tatum K, Kruse M & Kunselman J 2009. Exploring agency policing models and response to domestic violence. Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies and Management 32(1): 92–107
  • Commonwealth of Australia 2008. Prevention and reduction of family violence: An Australasian policing strategy. http://www.police.nsw.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/145434/australasian_policing_strategy_prevention_reduction_family_violence.pdf
  • Cook D et al. 2004. Evaluation of specialist domestic violence courts/fast track systems. United Kingdom: UK Department of Constitutional Affairs. http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/docs/specialistdvcourts.pdf
  • Council of Australian Governments (COAG) 2011. Intergovernmental agreement on federal financial relations public accountability and performance reporting schedule C. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. http://www.federalfinancialrelations.gov.au/content/inter_agreement_and_schedules/superseded/Schedule_C_dec_11.pdf
  • Day et al. 2009. Programs for men who perpetrate domestic violence: An examination of the issues underlying effectiveness of intervention programs. Journal of Family Violence 24: 203–212
  • Dearden J & Jones W 2008. Homicide in Australia: 2006–07 National Homicide Monitoring Program annual report. Monitoring report no. 1. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. http://aic.gov.au/publications/current%20series/mr/1-20/01.aspx
  • Department for Victorian Communities (DVC) 2007. Family violence risk assessment and risk management. Melbourne: Family Violence Coordination Unit
  • Domestic Violence Crisis Service (DVCS) 2008. Annual report 2008. http://www.dvcs.org.au/images/uploads/webreport_2008.pdf
  • Domestic Violence Prosecution Committee 2004. Guidelines for prosecution of domestic violence cases. Washington: US Department of Justice
  • Douglas H 2008. The criminal law’s response to domestic violence: What’s going on? Sydney Law Review 30: 439–469
  • Douglas H 2007. Not a crime like any other: Sentencing breaches of domestic violence protection orders Criminal Law Journal 31: 220–233
  • Dutton DG & Corvo K 2007. The Duluth model: A data-impervious paradigm and a failed strategy. Aggression and Violent Behavior 12: 658–667
  • Eley S 2005. Changing practices: The specialised domestic violence court process The Howard Journal 44(2): 113–124
  • Ellison L 2002. Prosecuting domestic violence without victim participation. The Modern Law Review 65: 834–858
  • Erez E & Hartley C 2003. Battered immigrant women and the legal system: A therapeutic jurisprudence perspective. Western Criminology Review 4(2): 155–169
  • Feder L & Wilson DB 2005. A meta-analytic review of court-mandated batterer intervention programs: Can courts affect abusers’ behavior? Journal of Experimental Criminology 1: 239–262
  • Finkleman D & Grisso T 1993. Therapeutic jurisprudence: From idea to application. New England Journal on Criminal and Civil Confinement 20(2): 243–257
  • Fritzler R & Simon M 2000. Creating a domestic violence court: Combat in the trenches. Court Review Journal Spring: 28–39. http://aja.ncsc.dni.us/courtrv/cr37/cr37-1/CR9FritzlerSimon.pdf
  • Gelles RJ 2007. The politics of research: The use, abuse, and misuse of social science data—the cases of intimate partner violence. Family Court Review 45: 42–51
  • Gold Coast Criminal Justice Pilot Project 2008. Developing a criminal justice system response to domestic violence. Paper presented to Just Partners—family violence, specialist courts & the idea of integration National Conference Canberra May 2008. http://www.domesticviolence.com.au/downloads/criminal%20code%20and%20specialist%20dv%20court%20powerpoint.ppt
  • Golias P 2004. Offender management framework: Prisons and community corrections services. Melbourne: Offender Development Services Unit, Strategic Services, Corrections Victoria
  • Gondolf E 2007. Theoretical and research support for the Duluth model: A reply to Dutton and Corvo. Aggression and Violent Behavior 12: 644–657
  • Gover A, Macdonald J & Alpert G 2003. Combating domestic violence: Findings from an evaluation of a local domestic violence court. Journal of Criminology and Public Policy 3(1): 109–132
  • Hannah-Moffat K 2005. Criminogenic needs and the transformative risk subject. Punishment & Society 7(1): 29–51
  • Hare S 2006. What do battered women want? Victim’s opinions on prosecution. Violence and Victims 21(5): 611–628
  • Hickman L & Simpson S 2003. Fair treatment or preferred outcome? The impact of police behaviour on victim reports domestic violence incidents. Law and Society Review 37(3): 607–634
  • Holder R 2008. Thanks for giving us a voice: The experience and views of victims of crime with their rights in the ACT justice system. Canberra: Victims of Crime Coordinator
  • Holder R 2007. Police & domestic violence: An analysis of domestic violence incidents attended by police in the ACT and subsequent actions. Research paper no.4. Sydney: Australian Domestic & Family Violence Clearinghouse
  • Holder R 2001. Domestic and family violence: Criminal justice interventions. Issues paper 2. Sydney: Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse
  • Holder R & Caruana J 2006. Criminal justice intervention in family violence in the ACT: The Family Violence Intervention Program 1998–2006. Canberra: Office of the Victims of Crime Coordinator
  • Holder R & Mayo N 2003. What do women want? Prosecuting family violence in the ACT. Current Issues in Criminal Justice 15(1): 5–25
  • Hubbard D 2000. Domestic violence courts in Canada: A special solution. Toronto, Canada: Legal Assistance Centre: 1–3
  • Hudson B 2003. Victims and offenders, in Hirsch A, Roberts J & Bottoms A (eds), Restorative justice and criminal justice: Competing or reconcilable paradigms? Oxford: Hart Publishing
  • Humphreys C, Houghton C & Ellis J 2008. Literature review: Better outcomes for children and young people experiencing domestic abuse: Directions for good practice. http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/08/04112614/0
  • Iyengar R 2009. Does the certainty of arrest reduce domestic violence? Evidence from mandatory and recommended arrest laws. Journal of Public Economics 93(1–2): 85–98
  • Jaaber R & Das Dasgupta S nd. Assessing social risks of battered women. http://files.praxisinternational.org/AssessingSocialRisk.pdf
  • Jolliffe D & Farrington D 2007. A systematic review of the national and international evidence on the effectiveness of interventions with violent offenders. Series 16/07. London: Ministry of Justice Research
  • Keys Young 2000. Evaluation of ACT interagency family violence intervention program. Canberra: ACT Department of Justice and Community Safety
  • King M 2003. Applying therapeutic jurisprudence in regional areas—the Western Australian experience. Murdoch University Electronic Journal of Law 10(2): 1–13
  • King M & Auty K 2005. Therapeutic jurisprudence: An emerging trend in courts of summary jurisdiction. Alternative Law Journal 30(2): 69–74
  • King M, Freiberg A, Batagol B & Hyams R 2009. Non-adversarial justice. Annandale: Federation Press
  • Knaggs T et al. 2008. The Waitakere and Manukau family violence courts: An evaluation summary. Wellington: New Zealand Ministry of Justice
  • Labriola M et.al. 2009. A national portrait of domestic violence courts. New York City, NY: Centre for Court Innovation
  • Law Reform Commission of Western Australia (LRCWA) 2008. Court intervention programs: Consultation paper. http://www.lrc.justice.wa.gov.au/096-CP.html
  • Levesque DA & Gelles RJ 1998. Does treatment reduce recidivism in men who batter: A meta-analytic evaluation of treatment outcome. Paper presented at the Program Evaluation and Family Violence Research: An International Conference: Durham, NH July 1998
  • Lievore D 2003. Non-reporting and hidden recording of sexual assault: An international literature review. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. http://www.aic.gov.au/en/publications/previous%20series/other/41-60/non-reporting%20and%20hidden%20recording%20of%20sexual%20assault.aspx
  • Lines C 2003. System change in bite-sized chunks. Platypus Magazine 78: 32–37
  • Malcolm D 2007. The application of therapeutic jurisprudence to the work of Western Australian courts. Journal of Judicial Administration 17: 127–133
  • Mazur R & Aldrich L 2003. What makes a domestic violence court work? Lessons from New York. American Bar Association 42(2). http://www.vaw.umn.edu/documents/whatmakesdvcourtwork/whatmakesdvcourtwork.pdf
  • Mills LG 2008. Violent partners: A breakthrough plan for ending the cycle of abuse. New York: Basic Books
  • Mulroney J 2003. Trends in interagency work. Topic paper 2. Sydney: Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse
  • Murray S & Powell A 2009. What’s the problem?’ Australian public policy constructions of domestic and family violence. Violence Against Women 15(5): 532–552
  • National Council to reduce violence against women and their children (National Council) 2009. Time for action: the National Council’s plan for Australia to reduce violence against women and their children, 2009–2021. Canberra: Department of Families, Housing, Community Services and Indigenous Affairs. http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/sa/women/pubs/violence/np_time_for_action/national_plan/Pages/default.aspx
  • Nguyen da Huong M & Salmelainen P 1992. Family, acquaintance and stranger homicide in New South Wales. Sydney: Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research. http://www.lawlink.nsw.gov.au/lawlink/bocsar/ll_bocsar.nsf/vwFiles/R28.pdf/$file/R28.pdf
  • Owen J & Owen S 2006. Domestic violence and ‘rough music’: A case for community based intervention. British Journal of Community Justice 4(2): 9–22
  • Pence E & McDonnell C 2001. Developing policies and protocols, in Hammer J & Itzin C (eds), Home truths about domestic violence: Feminist influences on policy and practice: A reader. New York: Routledge
  • Pence E, Mitchell S & Aoina A 2007. Western Australian safety and accountability audit of the Armadale Domestic Violence Intervention Project. Perth: Western Australian Government
  • Petrila J 1993. Paternalism and the unrealised promise of essays in therapeutic jurisprudence. New York Law School Journal of Human Rights 10: 685–705
  • Plotnikoff J & Woolfson R 2005. Review of the effectiveness of specialist courts in other jurisdictions. UK Department of Constitutional Affairs Research Series 3/05. London: Department of Constitutional Affairs: 1–59
  • Powell A & Murray S 2008. Children and domestic violence: Constructing a policy problem in Australia and New Zealand. Social & Legal Studies 17(4): 453–473
  • Rees A & Rivett M 2005. Let a hundred flowers bloom, let a hundred schools of thought contend: Towards a variety in programmes for perpetrators of domestic violence. Probation Journal 52(3): 277–288
  • Rivett M & Rees A 2008. Working with perpetrators and victims of domestic violence, in Green S, Lancaster E & Feasey S (eds), Addressing offending behaviour: Context, practice and values. Devon, UK: Willan publishing: 344–364
  • Roberts L & Indermaur D 2007. Key challenges in evaluating therapeutic jurisprudence initiatives, Journal of Judicial Administration 17: 60–70
  • Rodwell L & Smith N 2008. An evaluation of the NSW Domestic Violence Intervention Court model. Sydney: NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research
  • Schma W 2003. Therapeutic jurisprudence. Michigan Bar Journal January: 25–27
  • Shaffer C 2004. Therapeutic domestic violence courts: An efficient approach to adjudication? Seattle University Law Review 27: 1–17
  • Signal T & Taylor N 2008. Propensity to report intimate partner violence in Australia: Community demographics. Behavior and Social Issues 17: 8–19
  • Simon L 1995. A therapeutic jurisprudence approach to the legal processing of domestic violence cases. Journal of Psychology, Public Policy, and the Law 1(1): 43–79
  • Souhami A 2008. Multi-agency practice: Experiences in the youth justice system, in Green S, Lancaster E & Feasey S (eds), Addressing offending behaviour: Context, practice and values. Devon, UK: Willan Publishing: 208–225
  • Spangaro J, Zwi A & Poulos R 2009. The elusive search for definitive evidence on routine screening for intimate partner violence. Journal of Trauma, Violence and Abuse 10(1): 55–68
  • Stewart J 2005. Specialist domestic/family violence courts within the Australian context. Issues paper 10. Sydney: Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse
  • Stubbs J 2004. Restorative justice, domestic violence and family violence. Issues paper 9. Sydney: Australian Domestic and Family Violence Clearinghouse
  • Tasmanian Government 2004. Safe at home: A criminal justice framework for responding to family violence in Tasmania. Hobart: Department of Justice and Industrial Relations
  • Taylor N 2006. Analysis of family violence incidents July 2003–June 2004: Final report. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology. http://www.aic.gov.au/publications/previous%20series/other/61-80/analysis%20of%20family%20violence%20incidents.aspx
  • Tolman R & Weisz A 1995. Coordinated community intervention for domestic violence: The effects of arrest and prosecution on recidivism of woman abuse perpetrators. Crime and Delinquency 41(4): 481–495
  • Turgeon C 2008. Bridging theory and practice: A roundtable on court responses to domestic violence. Journal of Court Innovation 1(2): 345–369
  • United Kingdom Home Office (UK Home Office) 2008. Specialist domestic violence courts review 2007/08: Justice with safety. http://www.cps.gov.uk/publications/equality/sdvc_review.html
  • Urbis Keys Young 2002. Research into good practice models to facilitate access to the civil and criminal justice system by people experiencing domestic and family violence: Final report. Canberra: Office of the Status of Women
  • Urbis Keys Young 2001. Evaluation of the ACT Family Violence Intervention Program phase II. Canberra: ACT Department of Justice and Community Safety
  • Ursel E J 1997. The possibilities of criminal justice intervention in domestic violence: A Canadian case study. Current Issues in Criminal Justice 8(3): 263–274
  • Vallely C, Robinson A, Burton M & Tregidga J 2005. Evaluation of domestic violence pilot sites at Caerphilly (Gwent) and Croydon 2004/05. London: Crown Prosecution Services
  • Victims of Crime Coordinator (VOCC) 2009. We don’t shoot our wounded: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander victims of family violence access to justice and access to services in the ACT. Canberra: Office of the Victims of Crime Coordinator. http://www.victimsupport.act.gov.au/res/File/We%20don’t%20shoot%20our%20wounded.pdf
  • Victims of Crime Coordinator (VOCC) 2007. Unpublished report to the Family Violence Coordinating Committee
  • Ward T & Stewart C 2003. Criminogenic needs and human needs: A theoretical model. Psychology, Crime and Law 9(2): 125–143
  • Wexler D 1999. Therapeutic jurisprudence: An overview. Public lecture given on October 29 at the Thomas Cooley Law Review Disabilities Law Symposium
  • Wexler D & Winick B 2003. Putting therapeutic jurisprudence to work. American Bar Association Journal 89: 54–59
  • Wexler D & Winick B 1993. Patients, professionals, and the path of therapeutic jurisprudence: A response to Petrila.. New York Law School Journal of Human Rights 10: 907–914
  • Wilcox K 2008. Multi-agency responses to domestic violence—from good ideas to good practice. Australian Domestic and Family Violone Clearinghouse Winter 2008 (33): 4–6
  • Winick B 2000. Applying the law therapeutically in domestic violence cases. Kansas City Law Review 33: 69
  • Wolf et al. 2003. Barriers to seeking police help for intimate partner violence. Journal of Family Violence18(2): 121–129