Responding to Domestic Violence: Who Gets a Personal Protection Order When Other Resources Are Scarce?

Background and Purpose: Domestic violence (DV) continues to be widespread and serious problem; in Detroit there are approximately1000 DV-related police reports per month (Weisz, 2007).  Social work research provides recommendations for service providers who assist survivors of DV, but research yields mixed reviews on the deterrent effect of obtaining a Personal Protection Order (PPO) (Buzawa, Buzawa & Stark, 2012). Some researchers and advocates assert that involvement with the justice system may take away control from abused women (Fleury, 2002; Hickman & Simpson, 2003). Scarce residential and non-residential resources in regions like Detroit may lead victims to increase their use of civil and criminal justice interventions (Buzawa et al., 2012), including a PPO, because it is one of the few available resources. This poster reports on data about PPO use from telephone surveys of women named as victims on DV-related police reports.  Research questions address differences in demographics and satisfaction with criminal justice response to the violent event that led to the police report (focal incident) between women who did and did not seek PPOs.

Methods: After receiving IRB approval and developing a safe way to survey the women, we surveyed 187 Detroit women about experiences with violence and the criminal justice system, focusing on PPOs.  Of these women, 44 obtained PPOs after the focal incident.  Ninety one percent of the surveyed women were African American, and child-in common was the most common type of relationship with the perpetrator (46%).  Over half of the women (55.5%) earned less than $20,000 per year.

Results: While self-identified race was not associated with likelihood of calling the police again, African American women were significantly less likely than other women to obtain a PPO after the focal incident X²(1, N = 173) = 8.325, p=.004.  A logistic regression predicting likelihood of seeking a PPO after the focal incident was statistically significant, X² (5) = 33.678, p =.000. The model explained 27.1% (Nagelkerke R²) of the variance and correctly classified 74.0% of cases.  The following variables were significant: race (OR .141, p=.001), education beyond high school (OR .272, p=.002), and reporting that the criminal justice intervention for the focal incident was helpful (OR .242, p=.001). Presence of children, relationship status, severity of violence during or before the focal event, and survivors' risk predictions were not significant. 

Conclusions and Implications: While a PPO may have empowering benefits (Buzawa, et al., 2012), African American women in Detroit seemed to expect more potential future benefits in calling the police again rather than seeking a PPO.  Characteristics of the family or the violent relationship seemed less important. Women with more education or who were more satisfied with police intervention for the focal incident were more likely to seek a PPO.  The relationship between advanced education and getting a PPO suggest that the procedures for getting a PPO should be made more accessible, while advocates continue to push for increasing resources in the community.  These findings show the importance of including community context in studies of while studying DV resource use.