Partner Assault Response (PAR) Programs for Women An Ethical Dilemma
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This presentation explores the ethical dilemma facing Partner Assault Response (PAR) Programs for women charged with Domestic Violence (Intimate Partner Violence) in Ontario. It is based on the experiences of The Men's Program (CMHA Grey Bruce), which has provided PAR groups for men since 1989. Women facing domestic violence related charges are increasingly mandated to attend PAR Programs to fulfil their probation, early intervention, or 810 peace bond conditions. In 2016 as part of the contractual agreement with the Ministry of the Attorney General (MAG), the Men’s Program was required to provide PAR groups for women. The PAR program was original created for men. It’s founding principles and expectations are based on a feminist analysis with the goal of ending violence against women and children. The Men’s Program resisted offering PAR for women because relationship violence by women against men is different in nature than violence by men against women (Michael Johnson, Typology of Violence 2008). Offering PAR for women creates various ethical dilemmas from the feminist perspective because: Women who are charged with DV often have long histories of physical and sexual violence and may still be living with an abusive partner Women are more likely than men to admit their violent behaviour and are consequently more likely to be charged, Women involved with the criminal justice system need support, strategies for empowerment, safety, and ways to move forward in their lives without being charged again. Although we recognize that women benefit from support and counselling, involvement in the PAR program usually follows the criminalization of their resistance to relationship violence. The cumulative effect of women’s involvement in the criminal justice system regularly causes further harm and trauma by undermining their resilience and autonomy, increasing isolation, risking job loss, threatening access to children and increasing their economic vulnerability. The expansion of PAR programing for women reflects a gender-neutral approach to mandatory charging but leads to further women's oppression. As a result, despite being designed to increase women’s safety, PAR programs for women risk colluding with a justice system that further oppresses women. We will explore how a PAR Program (the Men's Program) collaborates with VAW services to meet these challenges while delivering Women’s PAR in Grey Bruce. Together we decided on a Violence and Trauma informed approach that pays particular attention to women's life stories, discussing the nature of gender based violence and its effects, and exploring avenues to support women's solidarity and empowerment. We also will highlight the need for fundamental differences between Men’s and Women’s PAR. Discussion will include: How and why women are charged with DV Common themes in women's stories of coercive control and sexual violence in context of their own use of violence towards partners The impacts of past trauma, violence, systemic oppression (Justice response, Child Welfare, Mental Health) on women and their children Alternatives to the present criminal justice approaches How to best support women and make system change
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,009 | 0,017 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,018 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,009 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».