Mandatory arrest for domestic violence and repeat offending: A meta-analysis

Abstract

Abstract Historically, domestic violence (DV) has been viewed as a private matter, which limited law enforcement's response to incidents of DV. Shifting perceptions of DV over time and a rise in public pressure to protect DV victims led to efforts within the criminal justice system to better respond to DV incidents. Specifically, mandatory arrest policies, driven by the landmark Minneapolis Domestic Violence Experiment, were widely adopted in an effort to reduce the likelihood of repeat offending and by effect revictimization. Subsequent replications of the experiment tended to find that arrest of DV offenders did not reduce the likelihood of another offense being committed over the follow-up period. To make sense of the mixed findings regarding the efficacy of mandatory arrest for DV, the current meta-analysis synthesizes the results of 11 published studies to determine whether arrest has an effect on crimes being committed following an arrest for DV. The results of the meta-analysis indicate that arrest did not limit the likelihood of another offense being committed during the follow-up periods and likely did not have a deterrent effect on DV offenders. Moderating variables, including research design and length of follow-up, were also analyzed. Policy implications and directions for future research are discussed.