The National Crime Victim Survey data indicate that family violence makes up 11 percent of all reported and unreported violence between 1998 and 2002. Of these roughly 3.5 million violent crimes committed against family members, 49 percent were crimes against spouses, 11 percent were sons or daughters victimized by a parent, and 41 percent were crimes against other family members. Police statistics (reported crimes) indicate that family violence makes up nearly 33 percent of all police-recorded violence. (Source: Family Violence Statistics, Bureau of Justice Statistics, June 2005.)

Family violence is measured in two different ways: through the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which is based on survey interviews with samples of the U.S. population, and through the FBI’s National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS), which is based on statistics compiled by police. The NCVS defines family violence as including all types of violent crime committed by an offender who is related to the victim either biologically or legally through marriage or adoption.  Domestic violence statistics from the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) include intimate-partner violence, as well as violence between family members.

The rate of family violence fell between 1993 and 2002 from an estimated 5.4 victims to 2.1 victims per 1,000 U.S. residents age 12 or older. Throughout this period, family violence accounted for about 1 in 10 violent victimizations. (Source: Family Violence Statistics, Bureau of Justice Statistics, June 2005.)

According to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the number of men murdered by intimates dropped by 75 percent since 1976, but the number of women killed by intimates was stable for nearly two decades. Approximately 11 percent of murder victims were determined to have been killed by an intimate. Female murder victims are substantially more likely than male murder victims to have been killed by an intimate partner. Nonfatal intimate partner victimization has declined from 5.8 percent in 1993 to 2.6 percent in 2004 (rate per 1,000 persons age 12 and older).  

Other statistics relating to family violence include:

• The majority (73 percent) of family violence victims were female. Females were 84 percent of spouse abuse victims and 86 percent of victims of abuse at the hands of a boyfriend or girlfriend.
• While about three-fourths of the victims of family violence were female, about three-fourths of the persons who committed family violence were male.
• Most family violence victims were white (74 percent), and the majority were between ages 25 and 54 (65.7 percent).

The first comprehensive domestic violence court program began in 1976 in Quincy, Massachusetts. In the early 1980s, Cook County (Chicago), Illinois, established a court to hear all domestic violence misdemeanor cases.  In subsequent years, a number of courts have instituted various systems to consolidate the adjudication of these cases. 

Domestic violence courts have a specialized process for handling cases involving domestic violence, including centralized intake processes, separate calendars for civil protection order petitions and criminal domestic violence cases, and domestic violence units. Domestic violence courts vary organizationally and procedurally and offer varied levels of services.  Many include intake units that orient victims to court procedures and provide legal assistance and referrals.  Another common feature is the designation of one or more specialized judges to hear exclusively domestic violence cases. Dedicated calendars and specialized judges facilitate the development of judicial expertise in domestic violence issues, while having a central location for hearing domestic violence cases promotes procedural uniformity.

The number of courts implementing some type of specialized process for domestic violence cases is growing; therefore, it is difficult to identify the exact number of operating domestic violence courts. The Center for Court Innovation (2007) estimates that there are nearly 300 courts nationwide that have specialized processing mechanisms for domestic violence cases. In January 1999, 160 courts had reported or been identified as having some type of specialized process for handling cases involving domestic violence, according to Susan Keilitz in Specialization of Domestic Violence Case Management in the Courts: A National Survey (NCSC, 2000). 

Domestic violence courts vary in their scope of jurisdiction, structure, and processes.  Many have jurisdiction over the issuance of civil protection orders (CPOs), but only some of these also have jurisdiction over criminal domestic violence cases.  Other domestic violence courts have jurisdiction for criminal cases but not for protection orders.  Some court programs dedicate a separate unit within a court to handle domestic violence disputes.  Other variations involve the type of calendar used and judicial assignments, the use of quasi-judicial officers, the length of rotation of judges through the court, intake procedures, extent of victim services, and the involvement of non-court personnel.

An integrated approach for domestic violence courts combines both the protection order and criminal calendars with the court’s jurisdiction and employs various methods of coordination with intake and other processes.  Dade County, Florida is a well-known example of an integrated model of a domestic violence court. A number of integrated domestic violence courts are operating in New York.

An integrated domestic violence court provides an opportunity to address the variety of interrelated family problems that may bring a family into court, starting with the primary reason of domestic violence. An integrated domestic violence court strives to provide an integrated-service-delivery approach to improving court efficiency and judicial decision making. Key components include case identification, jurisdiction of cases, court calendaring, legal representation, judicial monitoring, offender accountability, judicial and nonjudicial training, technology, courthouse safety, confidentiality, domestic violence services, stakeholder and community resources, and planning and technical assistance.

• Provide victim services with immediate access to advocates
• “Frontload” social services
• Keep victims informed of their case
• Schedule domestic violence cases promptly
• Create “safe places” within the courthouse
• Assign a permanent judge to the case
• Supervise defendants continuously
• Explore new methods of judicial monitoring
• Dedicate additional staff and resources for monitoring
• Create a separate compliance docket if there is high volume
• Build strong relationships with service providers
• Hold batterers programs accountable
• Think creatively and collaborate with other community agencies
• Use technology to enhance access to information
• Create strong linkages with a wide range of partners
• Convene regular meetings with criminal justice and social service partners
• Provide court personnel and partners with domestic-violence education and training
  
  

The use of technology to assist victims of domestic violence has increased dramatically over the last several years. Protection-order forms are available online on many court Web sites. Some jurisdictions offer the electronic filing of protection orders. Some provide sophisticated, online document-preparation programs. California provides streaming video and audio instructions for filing a protection order and includes a message from the state's chief justice.

Other examples of how technology is increasingly used to assist domestic violence victims and communities include accurate and timely service of protection orders through statewide registries for protection orders, automated victim notification programs, and videoconferencing to increase victim access to the courts. Using XML (eXtensible Markup Language) is the latest innovation for enhancing the electronic sharing of protection-order data. XML helps to improve the compatibility of data.

In addition, technology is also used to assist judges in their understanding of the dynamics of domestic violence. There are online benchbooks and educational courses on domestic violence and protection orders for judges. For specific examples on how technology is being used to enhance the justice system's response to domestic violence, see the Spring 2005 special issue of the Family Violence Forum newsletter.

Two separate federal firearms laws relate to domestic violence:  the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (VAWA) and the Omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act of 1997, which amends the Federal Gun Control Act of 1968. The Violence Against Women Act of 1994 contains a provision that prohibits the subject of a domestic violence restraining order from possessing firearms and ammunition. Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), anyone subject to a qualifying restraining order cannot possess a firearm or ammunition. Intimate partners include spouses, former spouses, or significant others, but do not include significant others with whom the defendant has NOT cohabited. 

A qualifying misdemeanor crime of domestic violence (MCDV) is a federal, state, or local offense that is a misdemeanor under federal or state law and has an element of use or attempted use of physical force, or the threatened use of a deadly weapon.  At the time the MCDV was committed, the defendant was a current or former spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim; a person with whom the victim shared a child in common; a person who was cohabiting with or had cohabited with the victim as a spouse, parent, or guardian; or a person who was or had been similarly situated to a spouse, parent, or guardian of the victim. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms describes certain exceptions to these qualifying offenses.