Abstract
This paper explores the proposed legislation entitled “Clare’s Law” which will be implemented in Alberta in June of 2020. Clare’s Law has been used as a response to the alarming reported rates of domestic violence around the world. Clare Wood was a woman who was killed by her ex-partner; she contacted the police numerous times over an extended period of time but was never assisted. Clare’s Law provides individuals with the right to know and the right to ask. This will allow concerned individuals to inquire about the criminal records of one’s partner. Furthermore, it requires emergency responders to inform individuals of one’s criminal history if it pertains to domestic violence. Premier Jason Kenney is addressing the alarming reported rates of domestic violence by enacting Clare’s Law in Alberta. This paper explores the benefits and concerns surrounding the implementation of such legislation. Clare’s Law may provide individuals with awareness of their partners criminal history regarding domestic violence, however this paper’s main argument is that Clare’s Law will not be effective and will cause more harm than good. The Law does not increase services, shelters or support for victims of violence. Furthermore, it may provoke victim blaming and it assumes accountability by police services and judicial systems that have continually failed victims. This paper is significant due to the significant rate of domestic violence in Alberta. This paper states that incidences of domestic violence will not improve because of Clare’s Law and could make situations worse for victims of domestic violence.
Highlights
This paper explores the proposed legislation entitled “Clare’s Law” which will be implemented in Alberta in June of 2020
This paper argues that the critiques outweigh the benefits; the main critiques explored in this paper are: Bill 17’s inability to address factors that perpetuate domestic violence (DV), the tremendous amount of confidence placed into systems that continually fail survivors, and the potential for Bill 17 to generate victim blaming by the general public and the judicial system
It is important to stress that these numbers only reflect violence that were reported to police; it is estimated that approximately 70% of DV incidents are not reported to police (Statistics Canada, 2016)
Summary
17 as a “preventative measure” for DV (Russell, 2019). Despite the preventative measures, the legislation fails to acknowledge any factors that contribute to DV. Marginalized communities, Indigenous women, are at a higher risk for experiencing DV (Brownridge, 2008; Wuerch et al, 2019). Indigenous women are four times more likely to experience DV in comparison to non-. Indigenous women in Manitoba and Saskatchewan were asked what their greatest health concern was and they stated that it was family violence. An Indigenous woman’s experience(s) with DV are more violent across all forms of abuse (physical, sexual, and emotional). Indigenous women tend to experience greater amounts of abuse after separation and “report exposure to greater severity of violence” when compared with non-Indigenous women Brownridge (2008) identified social background factors, situational characteristics, and patriarchal dominance as risk factors that influence the likelihood of DV.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
