Battered Women Who Kill Abusive Spouses: Self-Defense Rights

Introduction

In the last several decades, criminologists and social scientists have begun to pay greater attention to cases of battered women who kill their abusive spouses. Many of these women who kill their husbands claim they do so in self-defense. Nevertheless, they are often convicted of manslaughter and sentenced to imprisonment. Until recently, battered women were viewed by the public as either "mad" or "bad" (Noh, Lee, & Feltey, 2010) and were expected to be punished as murderers. Lately, however, scholars have begun to argue that killing an abusive spouse must be justified in extreme cases and codified in law (Ewing, 1990). This paper argues that women who kill their abusive spouses should have the right to defend themselves in court before any verdict is issued.

The Reality of Abuse Endured by Battered Women

According to the legal systems of most civilized nations, self-defense is justified when a person faces an imminent danger of physical harm or bodily injury, and when the use of lethal force can prevent that harm. It is reasonable, then, to argue that women who are severely beaten, tortured, psychologically abused, and raped on a regular basis — with no access to help — may use lethal force to protect themselves. They might use force to stop their spouses from inflicting further harm upon them.

To understand the gravity of the situation facing battered women, it is important to examine the abuses they endure. According to Ewing (1990), depending on the circumstances, battered women who kill their spouses have been "kicked, strangled, burned, scalded, shot, and stabbed" and have been attacked with guns, razors, and even automobiles. Many have suffered "cuts, bruises, lacerations, broken noses, broken bones," and many have been "sexually abused by their batterers: forced to have sexual intercourse, sexually abused with a variety of objects, and compelled to engage in group sex, bestiality, bondage, and other sadomasochistic sexual acts. Many of these women have been raped in front of their children" (pp. 581–582). Those who endure such experiences must have the right to defend themselves before a jury.

Counterarguments: Why Some Argue for Punishment

Those who argue that women who kill their abusive spouses should be punished as murderers also raise valid points. For example, women can leave abusive husbands rather than waiting until the situation escalates to manslaughter. They can also report abuse to police or other responsible agencies. It should also be considered whether manslaughter is a proportionate and legitimate response to abuse in any given situation. Most importantly, not punishing women who kill their spouses may set a troubling legal precedent — one that could be exploited by women who kill their husbands for illegitimate reasons, such as financial gain or property. Wives, like any other person, must be held accountable for their actions, especially when those actions result in another person's death.

Conclusion

Family violence is, unfortunately, a deeply disturbing phenomenon. Men and women sometimes use lethal force against members of their own families. Men who kill their wives are condemned in most cases, but the situation with women who kill their husbands is more complicated because of a crucial distinction. While most men who murder their wives are abusers themselves, most women who murder their husbands are victims of abuse. Research on intimate partner violence continues to highlight this asymmetry. For this reason, these women should have the right to present their case in court, arguing that they killed their spouses in self-defense.

References

Ewing, C. (1990). Psychological self-defense: A proposed justification for battered women who kill. Law and Human Behavior, 14(6), 579–594. doi:10.1007/BF01044883

Noh, M. S., Lee, M. T., & Feltey, K. M. (2010). Mad, bad, or reasonable? Newspaper portrayals of the battered woman who kills. Gender Issues, 27(3/4), 110–130. doi:10.1007/s12147-010-9093-9