پژوهش های جرم شناسی کاربردی

پژوهش های جرم شناسی کاربردی

حقوق درمان مدار: راهبردی برای پاسخ ریشه ای به خشونت خانگی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان
1 دانشیار گروه حقوق، دانشکده علوم ‌انسانی، دانشگاه کاشان، کاشان، ایران. رایانامه: ghomashi@kashanu.ac.ir
2 دانشجوی دکتری حقوق جزا و جرم‌شناسی، گروه حقوق، دانشکده علوم انسانی و حقوق، دانشگاه کاشان، کاشان، ایران. (نویسنده مسئول). رایانامه: omid_motaghi@yahoo.com
10.22034/aqcr.2025.2069791.1101
چکیده
زمینه و هدف: مقاله حاضر با نگاهی انتقادی، به بررسی دلایل ناکامی رویکردهای سنتی در پاسخ کیفری به خشونت خانگی پرداخته و پس از آن، مدل موفق دادگاه‌های خشونت خانگی در نظام حقوقی کامن‌لا را معرفی مینماید. در نهایت نیز مفهوم و راهبردهای حقوق درمانمدار به‌ عنوان مبنای نظری این نوع دادگاه‌ها مورد بررسی قرار خواهد گرفت. هدف از این خطسیر، آن است که با تحلیل یک مدل موفق پاسخ به خشونت خانگی و تبیین مهم‌ترین مبنای نظری آن، زمینه برای بومیسازی این مدل کامنلایی فراهم گردد.
روش: پژوهش حاضر با رویکرد توصیفی- تحلیلی و به شیوه کتابخانه‌ای انجام شده است. اطلاعات مورد نیاز از منابع علمی معتبر (کتاب، مجلات و وب‌سایت‌ها) گردآوری و با استفاده از منطق و استدلال، تجزیه و تحلیل شده است.
یافته‌ها و نتایج: یافته‌های پژوهش نشان می‌دهد که عواملی همچون تعارض اهداف مجازات‌های سنتی با ضرورت حفظ کیان خانواده، ماهیت ترافعی دادرسی، تمرکز بر مجازات به‌جای حل مسئله و بی‌توجهی به آسیب‌های جسمی- روانی ناشی از مداخله کیفری، از مهم‌ترین دلایل ناکارآمدی رویکردهای سنتی نظام عدالت کیفری است. در مقابل، دادگاه‌های خشونت خانگی با الهام از حقوق درمان‌مدار و به‌کارگیری راهبردهایی همچون رویکرد مبتنی بر آسیب‌شناسی، دادرسی غیرترافعی، تمرکز بر رفع علل ریشهای، مشارکت میان‌رشته‌ای و عدالت رویه‌ای، موفقیت چشمگیری در کاهش نرخ تکرار خشونت خانگی و حفظ کیان آن به‌دست آوردهاند. این الگو با تمرکز بر ارتقای بهزیستی طرفین، پاسخگو کردن بزهکار و تأمین ایمنی و توانمندسازی بزه‌دیده، از آثار ضددرمانی رویکردهای سنتی کاسته و به رفع ریشه‌ای خشونت خانگی پرداخته است.
کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله English

Therapeutic Jurisprudence: A Strategy for a Radical Response to Domestic Violence

نویسندگان English

Saeid ghomashi 1
Omid Motaghi Ardakani 2
1 Associate Professor, Department of Law, Faculty of Humanities, University of kashan, kashan, Iran. Email: ghomashi@kashanu.ac.ir
2 Ph.D. Student in Criminal Law and Criminology Department of Law, Faculty of Humanities and Law, Kashan University, Kashan, Iran. (Corresponding Author). Email: omid_motaghi@yahoo.com
چکیده English

Field and Aims: This article critically examines the shortcomings of traditional criminal justice responses to domestic violence and introduces the effective model of domestic violence courts within the common law legal system. It also explores the concept and strategies of Therapeutic Jurisprudence, which provide the theoretical foundation for these courts. The objective of this course is to establish a framework for localizing this common law model by analyzing effective responses to domestic violence and elucidating their key theoretical underpinnings.
Method: The study employed a descriptive-analytical approach based on comprehensive library research. Information was gathered from reputable scientific sources, including books, journals, and websites, and analyzed through logical reasoning.
Findings and Conclusions: The findings indicate that several factors contribute to the ineffectiveness of traditional approaches within the criminal justice system. These factors include the conflict between the goals of traditional punitive measures and the necessity of preserving family integrity, the adversarial nature of trials, a focus on punishment rather than problem-solving, and the neglect of physical and psychological harm resulting from criminal interventions. In contrast, domestic violence courts, informed by Therapeutic Jurisprudence and incorporating strategies such as a Trauma-Informed Practice, non-adversarial trials, a focus on addressing root causes, interdisciplinary collaboration, and procedural justice, have significantly reduced the recurrence of domestic violence while upholding family integrity. By promoting the well-being of both parties, holding perpetrators accountable, and ensuring the safety and empowerment of victims, this model mitigates the anti-therapeutic effects of traditional approaches and effectively addresses the underlying causes of domestic violence.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

Domestic violence
Therapeutic Jurisprudence
Problem-solving approach
procedural justice
- ابراهیمی، شهرام و ملک‌افضلی اردکانی، مجتبی. (1403). فردی‌سازی بازپروری در پرتو الگوهای سه‌گانه اصاح مجرمین. آموزه‌های حقوق کیفری، 27(21)، 35۵۷.
https://doi.org/10.30513/cld.2025.6725.2076
- عزیزی، علی. (1401). دادگاه‌های حل مسئله در حقوق کیفری ایران. چاپ اول. بنیاد حقوقی میزان.
- قماشی، سعید. (1389). بنیادهای جرم‌انگاری در حقوق کیفری نوین. حقوق اسلامی، 24، 147178.
https://hoquq.iict.ac.ir/article_18317.html
- Al-Ramahi, A. (2008). Sulh: A crucial part of Islamic dispute resolution. Islam Law Soc, 15(2), 187–214.
 https://doi.org/10.1163/156851908X298121
- Ambelas, A. (1991). The task of treatment and the multidisciplinary team. Psychiatric Bulletin, 15(2), 77–79.
 https://doi.org/10.1192/pb.15.2.77
- Australian Government Publishing Service. (2000). Managing justice: A review of the federal civil justice system (Report No. 89).
 https://nla.gov.au/nla.obj-2677287866
- Barsky, B. A., Cucolo, H. E., & Sisti, D. A. (2021). Expanding therapeutic jurisprudence across the federal judiciary. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 49(1), 96–106.
- Berman, G., & Feinblatt, J. (2015). Good courts: The case for problem-solving justice. Quid Pro Books.
- Bloch, R. (2007). The American Revolution, wife beating, and the emergent value of privacy. Early American Studies, 5(2), 223–251.
- Campbell, J. K., Nicolla, S., Weissman, D. M., & Moracco, K. E. (2024). The Uptake and Measurement of Alternative Approaches to Domestic Violence Intervention Programs: A Scoping Review. Trauma Violence Abuse, 25(4), 3269–3284.
- Center for Court Innovation. (2010). Creating a domestic violence court: Adapting the model to your community [A planning toolkit].
https://www.supremecourt.ohio.gov/docs/JCS/domesticViolence/topics/DVCourts/DVCToolkit.pdf
- Center for Court Innovation. (2019). Trauma-informed courts: A guide for court professionals (pp. 10–30). https://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/media/document/2019/Trauma_Informed_Courts_Guide.pdf
- Cissner, A. B., Picard-Fritsche, S., & Rempel, M. (2014). New York State’s integrated domestic violence court model: Results from four recent studies. Domestic Violence Report, 19(4), 51–63.
- Cissner, A. B., & Rempel, M. (2005). The state of the art in domestic violence courts: A view from the bench. Center for Court Innovation.
- Colak, M., & Erdost, H. E. (2004). Organizational justice: A review of the literature and some suggestions for future research. 25(3), 51–84.
- Cullen, F. T., & Jonson, C. L. (2017). Correctional Theory: Context and Consequences. SAGE Publications.
- Dagenhardt, D. M., Heideman, A., & Freiburger, T. L. (2023). Examining the impact of jail sanctions on recidivism for domestic violence probationers. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 38(11–12), 7383–7403.
https://doi.org/10.1177/08862605221145708
- Derr, K., Hattery, A. J., & Smith, E. (2025). Help or Harm? Criminalizing Intimate Partner Violence and Feminist Abolitionist Frames. Violence Against Women, 31(6–7), 1670–1687.
 https://doi.org/10.1177/10778012241234895.
- Eckberg, D. A., & Gover, A. R. (2018). The impact of a specialized domestic violence court on victim perceptions of safety. J Interpers Violence, 33(12), 1939–1960.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0886260515624228
- Ford, D., & Regoli, M. (1993). The Indianapolis Domestic Violence Prosecution Experiment. National Institute of Justice.
- Global Compassion Coalition. (2025). The adversarial system and its limitations. Global Compassion Coalition.
 https://www.globalcompassioncoalition.org/topics/law-and-justice/the-adversarial-system-and-its-limitations/
- Gover, A. R., MacDonald, J. M., & Alpert, G. P. (2008). Combating domestic violence: Findings from an evaluation of a domestic violence court. Criminol Public Policy, 7(4), 633–659.
 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-9133.2008.00531.x
- Grootelaar, H., Waterbolk, T. W., & Winkels, J. (2014). The Relationship between Role Conception, Judicial Behaviour and Perceived Procedural Justice: Some Explorative Remarks in the Context of Dutch Post-Defence Hearings. Utrecht Law Rev, 10, 147–161.
- Groves, M. (2016). Procedural fairness: The duty and its content. Australian Law Reform Commission.
https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/procedural-fairness-the-duty-and-its-content/
- Herman, J. L. (2005). Justice from the victim’s perspective. Violence Against Women, 11(5), 571–602.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077801205274450.
- Herman, J. L. (2015). Trauma and recovery: The aftermath of violence—From domestic abuse to political terror (1st ed.). Basic Books.
- HM Inspectorate of Probation. (2020). Procedural justice – HM Inspectorate of Probation. Procedural Justice.
 https://hmiprobation.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk/our-research/evidence-base-probation-service/models-and-principles/procedural-justice/
- Jaffe, P. G., Crooks, C. V., Reid, M., White, J., Pugh-Markie, D., & Baker, L. (2018). Enhancing judicial skills in domestic violence cases: The development, implementation, and preliminary evaluation of a model US programme. J Soc Welf Fam Law, 40(4), 496–514.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09649069.2018.1519655.
- Johnson, S., & Zlotnick, C. (2012). Trauma-Informed Courtrooms: A Review of Environmental Design. J Fam Violence, 27(5), 451–460. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10896-012-9453-7
- Juli, M. R., Juli, R., Juli, G., & Figliuzzi, S. (2023). Victim Blaming: Being a Victim Twice. Comparison of Emotional and Socio-Cultural Aspects. Psychiatr Danub, 35(Suppl 2), 150–154.
- Keilitz, S. L. (2000). Specialized courts: A concept paper. National Center for State Courts.
- King, M. (2003). Applying Therapeutic Jurisprudence from the Bench: Challenges and Opportunities. Alternative Law Journal, 28(4), 172–176. https://doi.org/10.1177/1037969X0302800406
- Koshan, J. (2014a). Investigating Integrated Domestic Violence Courts: Lessons from New York. In LSN: Causes & Consequences of Crime.
- Koshan, J. (2014b). Investigating Integrated Domestic Violence Courts: Lessons from New York. Osgoode Hall Law Journal, 51(3), 989–1036. https://doi.org/10.60082/2817-5069.2762
- Labriola, M., Bradley, S., O’Sullivan, C., Rempel, M., & Moore, S. (2012). National portrait of domestic violence courts. Bibliogov. https://nyf.issuelab.org/resources/14974/14974.pdf
- Lind, E. A., & Tyler, T. R. (2013). The Social Psychology of Procedural Justice—E.Allan Lind, Tom R. Tyler—Google Books. Springer Science & Business Media. https://books.google.be/books?hl=fa&lr=&id=oyXZ5IM0J8MC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=The+social+psychology+of+procedural+justice&ots=QuJEwTA-8Z&sig=3-2ZIN1DWRjto3z46YtSdkjlI0Y&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=The%20social%20psychology%20of%20procedural%20justice&f=false
- MacCoun, R. J. (2005). Voice, control, and belonging: The double-edged sword of procedural fairness. Annu Rev Psychol, 56, 663–693.
- Miranda, R. B., & LangeID, S. (2020). Domestic violence and social norms in Norway and Brazil: A preliminary, qualitative study of attitudes and practices of health workers and criminal justice professionals. PLoS One, 15(12). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0243352
- Pleck, E. (1989). Criminal Approaches to Family Violence, 1640-1980. Crime and Justice, 11, 19–57.
https://doi.org/10.1086/449151
- Redding, E. M., Moracco, K. E., Barrington, C. L., & Corbo, A. M. (2023). He Will Not Leave Us Alone and I Need the Courts to Help”: Defendants’ Use of Nonphysical Violence in Domestic Violence Protective Order Cases. Violence Against Women, 29(5), 1044–1059.
- Rokeach, M., Miller, M. G., & Snyder, J. A. (1971). The Value Gap between Police and Policed1. Journal of Social Issues, 27(2), 155–171. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4560.1971.tb00658.x
- Schmidt, J., & Sherman, L. (1993). Does Arrest Deter Domestic Violence. Am Behav Sci, 36(5), 601–609.
 https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764293036005005
- Sparks, E., & Gruelle, K. (2017). Intimate Partner Violence: Effective Procedure, Response and Policy (2nd ed.). Taylor & Francis Group.
- Strang, H., & Braithwaite, J. (2002). Restorative justice and family violence. Cambridge University Press.
- Tesovic, O. (2024). Problem-solving courts in comparative law: Combination of therapy and responsibility. Nauka, Bezbednost, Policija, 29(2), 134–150. https://doi.org/10.5937/nabepo29-48482
- Thibaut, J., & Walker, L. (1975). Procedural Justice: A Psychological Analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
- United Nations. (1993). Strategies for confronting domestic violence (p. 11).
Wang, W., Su, Y., Huan, J., Liu, J., Chen, W., Zhang, Y., Li, C.-Y., Chang, K.-J., - - Xin, X., Shen, L., & Lyu, M. R. (2024). Asclepius: A Spectrum Evaluation Benchmark for Medical Multi-Modal Large Language Models. Annual Meeting of the Association for Computational Linguistics.      https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Asclepius%3A-A-Spectrum-Evaluation-Benchmark-for-Wang-Su/e9b462fce328853292a7b6d5a71f4f80610ad190
- Wemmers, J.-A., & Cyr, K. (2005). Can mediation be therapeutic for crime victims? An evaluation of victims’ experiences in mediation with young offenders. Can J Criminol Crim Justice, 47(3), 527–544.
 https://doi.org/10.3138/cjccj.47.3.527.
- Wexler, D. B. (2001). Robes and Rehabilitation: How Judges Can Help Offenders “Make Good.” Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association, 38(1), 18–23.
- Wexler, D. B., & Winick, B. J. (1996). Law in a therapeutic key: Developments in therapeutic jurisprudence. Carolina Academic Press.
- Winick, B. J. (1991). Competency to consent to treatment: The distinction between assent and objection. Houston Law Rev, 28(1), 15–61.
- Winick, B. J., & Wexler, D. B. (2015). Drug Treatment Court: Therapeutic Jurisprudence Applied. 18(3), 479–486.
- Wong, J. S., & Bouchard, J. (2021). Judging the book by its cover: What comprises a cognitive behavioral intervention program for perpetrators of intimate partner violence? Criminal Justice and Behavior, 48(10), 1278–1299. https://doi.org/10.1177/00938548211017599
دوره 3، شماره 9
پاییز
پاییز 1404
صفحه 31-54

  • تاریخ دریافت 03 شهریور 1404
  • تاریخ بازنگری 21 آبان 1404
  • تاریخ پذیرش 25 آبان 1404
  • تاریخ اولین انتشار 01 آذر 1404
  • تاریخ انتشار 01 آذر 1404