Research has found the link between perpetrator unemployment and domestic violence to be so significant that experts conclude any effective domestic violence prevention strategy must address unemployment and male poverty.[Main article] /
[SIDEBAR:] Source

Periman, Deborah

English

ScholarWorks@UA

10 Alaska Justice Forum 30(3–4), Fall 2013/Winter 2014                                                                                                                  Collateral consequences(continued from page 9) various Smart Justice initiatives across the country and highlighted the progress Texas has made in reducing recidivism and low-ering numbers of prisoners. In brief, Smart Justice or Justice Reinvestment refers todiverting public funds away from prisongrowth and maintenance and using them on programs designed to reduce the numbers entering prison for the first time and break the cycle of recidivism for those alreadyincarcerated.  Following implementationof these programs in Texas, in the two years between 2011 and 2013 the state housed7,000 fewer prisoners, parole revocationsdropped 40 percent, juvenile probationsdropped 30 percent, and the arrest ratedeclined 10 percent.   The state closed one prison during that period and has approved closing two more.  These results stand in stark contrast to the 2007 prediction by the Texas Legislative Budget Board that within five years there would be 17,700 new pris-oners in the state and that eight or nine new prisons would be required, at a public cost of $250 million plus annual operating costs of $40–50 million per prison. Representative Madden recommendedthat Alaska legislators look at legislationrecently passed in other states — amongthem, Ohio. Ohio has emerged as a national leader in its efforts to promote the success-ful reintegration of released individuals. In 2012, the Ohio legislature passed Senate Bill337 which created a certificate for qualifica-tion for employment. The certificate does two things — it relieves eligible individuals from automatic disqualification from some state-issued occupational licenses and itprovides immunity for employers fromnegligent hiring liability related to hiresof individuals holding a certificate. The2012 reforms also included a mechanismby which eligible individuals with no more than one felony conviction, two differentmisdemeanor convictions, or one felony andone misdemeanor conviction may have theirrecords sealed. These and similar measures are slowly being adopted across the country as stateleaders acknowledge that conviction-based constraints on employment and participationin other aspects of civic life make commu-nities less safe and increase the public cost of policing and corrections. Such measures include “ban the box” legislation preventingemployers from asking about an applicant’s criminal past at the initial stages of hiring or licensing, protection for employers from negligent hire suits based on employment ofthose with criminal convictions, provisions for the expungement and sealing of certain criminal records, statutes that would make state residents with criminal convictionseligible for federal food and housing benefitsfrom which they might otherwise be barred, and repeal of laws preventing individualswith criminal convictions from voting.Senators Ellis and Coghill’s work to advancethe cataloging of collateral consequencesin Alaska and examine the impact of these laws on families and local communitiesfalls squarely within this bipartisan reform movement. Conclusion As Senator Coghill noted in a March28, 2013 press release, “The whole point of rehabilitation is to keep people from going back down that road of crime. If we take away every opportunity they have to rebuildtheir lives after serving their time, we are basically paving their way back to prison.” And as Attorney General Holder observed, this is about far more than fairness to those released. Fundamentally, it is about thepublic good. The bipartisan working group’sinitiative to reduce state-created obstacles to successful employment and full enjoy-ment of civic life for those with criminalconvictions in their past has the potentialto improve community safety and publichealth, reduce state expenses associated withrecidivism, make available an underutilized human resource to Alaska’s businesses, and vastly improve the quality of life for thechildren of those convicted. This work is not easy. It is, in fact,immensely difficult. It requires thoughtful, time-consuming analysis of hundredsof individual statutory and regulatoryprovisions and a careful, objective balancingof public interests. It is, nevertheless, work that is overdue and work that is a critical component of community health and safety. Deb Periman, J.D., is a member of the Justice Center faculty.  Simona Gerdtsand Nessabeth Rooks contributed valuable research on this topic.  For further reading on  the collateral consequences of criminal conviction, see http://justice.uaa.alaska. edu/a-z/c/collateral_consequences.html. Employment Barriers and Domestic Violence Deborah Periman In 2003 the American Journal of Public Health published the results of an 11-city study looking at risk factors for femicide.In the article, “Risk Factors for Femicidein Abusive Relationships: Results from aMultisite Case Control Study,” investigatorslooked at differences in demographic, back-ground, and relationship variables between a group of femicide victims and a control group of abused women.  Of the variables examined, the strongest risk factor for intimate partner femicide was the perpetrator’slack of employment. The researchers also found that “[i]n fact,abuser’s [sic] lack of employment was the only demographic risk factor that signifi-cantly predicted femicide risks” after con-trolling for other factors.  Unemployment increased the risk of femicide four timesover the risk associated with employed abus-ers.  Moreover, unemployment appeared to underlie increased risks generally attributedto race and ethnicity. The link between perpetrator unemploy-ment and domestic violence is so significantthat experts conclude any effective domesticviolence prevention strategy must address unemployment and male poverty. Profes-sor Deborah Weissman of the UniversitySources Campbell, Jacquelyn C., et al. (2003). “Risk Factors for Femicide in Abusive Relationships:Results from a Multisite Case Control Study.” American Journal of Public Health 93(7):1089–1097 (Jul 2003). (http://dx.doi.org/10.2105/AJPH.93.7.1089). Nou, Jennifer; & Timmins, Christopher. (2005). “How Do Changes in Welfare Law Affect Domestic Violence? An Analysis of Connecticut Towns, 1990–2000.” Journal of LegalStudies 34(2): 445–470 (Jun 2005). (http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/429847). Raphael, Jody. (2004). “Rethinking Criminal Justice Responses to Intimate PartnerViolence.” Violence Against Women 10(11): 1354–1366 (Nov 2004). (http://dx.doi. org/10.1177/1077801204269350). Weissman, Deborah M. (2007). “The Personal Is Political — and Economic: Rethinking Domestic Violence.” Brigham Young University Law Review 2007(2): 387–450. (http:// digitalcommons.law.byu.edu/lawreview/vol2007/iss2/3/). Alaska Justice Forum 30(3–4), Fall 2013/Winter 2014 11                                                                  of North Carolina School of Law, who has written extensively on this issue, points to the work of researcher and law professorJody Raphael which indicates that “theelimination of male poverty is a critical part of domestic violence prevention strategy.”In her article, “The Personal Is Political— and Economic: Rethinking DomesticViolence,” Professor Weissman also notes that the effect of economic instability onmental health is tremendous: “Poverty cre-ates stress, households have diminishedresources available to cope with stress, and stress is a source of violence.”  A 1994 studyby the U.S. Department of Justice cited by researchers Jennifer Nou and ChristopherTimmins demonstrated that as householdincome decreases, family violence increases.At the time of the study, women in house-holds where the annual income was below $10,000 disclosed suffering from domestic abuse at a rate five times higher than womenfrom higher income households.  Based on this evidence, Professor Weissman and oth-ers conclude that to reduce rates of domesticviolence officials must focus on offenderjoblessness at sentencing, in probation, and in reentry services.  Batterers who have jobsand concomitant ties to the community are less likely to reoffend. Reducing the risk that a former offender will engage in family violence has importantconsequences for the growth and develop-ment of Alaska’s children.  National datashows that over 35 percent of violencebetween partners occurs while at least one child is in the home.  Children living inhomes where one adult partner is abusedare much more likely to be physically orpsychologically abused than children living in homes without such violence. These chil-dren are also at increased risk of becoming batterers themselves, attempting suicide,and suffering from depression, obesity,substance abuse, and overall poor physical health in later life. Deb Periman, J.D., is a member of the Justice Center faculty. Early Online Version of Forum If you would like to receive an early online version of the Alaska Justice Forum, please email editor@uaa.alaska.edu and put “Forum online” in the subject line.                New Staff Khristy Parker, Justice ‘08 and MPA(Criminal Justice emphasis) ‘13, has joined the staff of the Alaska Justice StatisticalAnalysis Center (AJSAC) as a researchprofessional. Ms. Parker has worked for the Justice Center as a research assistant and forthe UAA Institute for Social and Economic Research (ISER) as a research associate. The AJSAC, established in 1986 andhoused within the Justice Center, assistsAlaska criminal justice and law enforcementagencies through the collection, analysis,and reporting of crime and justice statistics. Recent Faculty Publications Barton, William H.; Jarjoura, G. Roger; & Rosay, AndréB. (2012). “Applying a Developmental Lens to JuvenileReentry and Reintegration.” Journal of Juvenile Justice1(2): 95–107 (Spring 2012). (http://www.journalofjuvjustice. org/jojj0102/article07.htm; http://justice.uaa.alaska.edu/ research/2000/0411.targeted_reentry/0411.06.applying_lens. html). Barton, William H.; Jarjoura, G. Roger; & Rosay, André B. (2014).“Evaluating a Juvenile Reentry Program: An Elusive Target.”Chap. 13. In Matthew S. Crow & John Ortiz Smykla (eds.), Offender Reentry: Rethinking Criminology and CriminalJustice, pp. 307–329. Burlington, MA: Jones & BartlettLearning. (http://justice.uaa.alaska.edu/research/2000/0411. targeted_reentry/0411.07.evaluating_tr.html). Knudsen Latta, Kristin S. (2013). Alaska Boards and Commissions:Results of the Alaska Citizen Members Survey. Summaryreport prepared for the Office of the Governor, Boards and Commissions. Anchorage, AK: Justice Center, Universityof Alaska Anchorage.  (JC 1403.01). (http://justice.uaa. alaska.edu/research/2010/1403.boards_comissions/1403.01. akboards.html). Myrstol, Brad A. (2012). “The Alcohol-Related Workload ofPatrol Officers.” Policing: An International Journal of PoliceStrategies & Management 35(1): 55–75 (2012).  (http://dx.doi. org/10.1108/13639511211215450). Myrstol, Brad A.; & Brandeis, Jason. (2012). The PredictiveValidity of Marijuana Odor Detection: An Examinationof Alaska State Trooper Case Reports 2006–2010. Reportprepared for the Alaska State Troopers. Anchorage, AK:Justice Center, University of Alaska Anchorage.  (JC 1110.02).(http://justice.uaa.alaska.edu/research/2010/1110.02.ast. marijuana/1110.02.marijuana.html). Payne, Troy C. (2013). “Hot Spots.” In Kenneth J. Peak (ed.), Encyclopedia of Community Policing and Problem Solving, pp. 194–198. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications. (http:// justice.uaa.alaska.edu/publications/authors/payne/1060.03. hot_spots.html). Payne, Troy C. (2013). Officer-Involved Shootings in Anchorage1993–2013. Report prepared for Anchorage PoliceDepartment. Anchorage, AK: Justice Center, University of Alaska Anchorage.  (JC 1402.01). (http://justice.uaa.alaska. edu/research/2010/1402.apd_ois/1402.01.officer_involved_ shootings.html). Payne, Troy C.; & Arneson, Michelle. (2012). Green BayChronic Nuisance Notification Evaluation, 2006–2010. Reportprepared for the Green Bay Police Department, Green Bay, Wisconsin. Anchorage, AK: Justice Center, University ofAlaska Anchorage.  (JC 1301.01). (http://justice.uaa.alaska. edu/research/2010/1301.greenbay/1301.01.green_bay_eval. html). Payne, Troy C.; Gallagher, Kathleen; Eck, John E.; & Frank, James. (2013). “Problem Framing in Problem Solving: ACase Study.” Policing: An International Journal of Police Strategies & Management 36(4): 670–682.  (http://dx.doi. org/10.1108/PIJPSM-01-2012-0081). Rivera, Marny; Parker, Khristy; & McMullen, Jennifer. (2012). 2010 Anchorage Underage Drinking Survey: A Look atAdult Attitudes, Perceptions, and Norms. Report prepared for Communities Mobilizing for Change on Alcohol, Volunteers of America Alaska. Anchorage, AK: Justice Center, UniversityofAlaskaAnchorage.  (JC 1010.03). (http://justice.uaa.alaska. edu/research/2010/1010.voa/1010.03.auds_2010_report. html). Snodgrass, G. Matthew; Rosay, André B.; & Gover, Angela R. (2013). “Modeling the Referral Decision in Sexual Assault Cases: An Application of Random Forests.” American Journalof Criminal Justice (May 2013).  (http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s12103-013-9210-x). 

Employment Barriers and Domestic Violence

https://scholarworks.alaska.edu/bitstream/11122/10498/1/ajf.30.3e.employment-dv.pdf

Employment Barriers and Domestic Violence

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

ScholarWorks@UA