Why don't we see perps of domestic violence as dangers to society and require mandatory psych lockup?

Question

Why don't we recognize serious perps as "dangers to themselves and others" and send them off for eval and meds like we do suicides? There are meds and tx available for anger management and psychotic rage. Instead, we blame the victims, trying to get them to be mind readers, and punish them, especially the children, by making them live in shelters and safe houses as fugitives while the perps get out immediately and are free to offend again with no tx, no meds, no psychiatric record, free to buy guns in many cases and much more angry than before. No wonder more victims don't turn the abusers in. Surely, we can pass a law that says it's insane to abuse those who love you, especially your children? The attitude seems to be that its reasonable to lose your temper with your family members and fly into a psychotic rage that does put "others" at risk. But often the victims aren't considered people who count. Why is this? Why in this day and age do we still blame the victims?

Answer 1

In the US, we don't like our victims. We want to be free of responsibility and have easy answers for everything. It's easier to point to the victim and tell them how to protect themselves then to corner the offender and really really dig deep into the problem. I think eventually we will get there and start declaring people who abuse others psychotic and treat them for mental illness. I agree with you. Besides...treatment is more expensive then housing someone. Housing a victim can be fed funded faster than setting up a treatment center with "qualified" professionals. You don't have to be a professional or qualified to give someone a roof over their head for 3mos to a year.

Answer 2

Surely you cannot pass laws that say it is insane to abuse those who love you, especially children. While any type of abuse, be it spousal, child abuse, or domestic abuse, it deplorable and unjustifiable by any stretch of a rational moral judgment, one cannot simply justify a law that presumptively concludes "insanity" from conduct as you ahve described. The United States Constitution protects all citizens, even its most deplorable, from unlawful deprivations of liberty. Justice may seem slow or ineffective to the victims of domestic abuse, but we should all fear a society that seeks to justify swift punnishment without properly ascertaining what actually happened. Jumping to conclusions is every bit as dangerous as setting perpetrators free, and I, for one, am unwilling to simply give up Constitutional freedoms (such as the ability to decine extending the government the chance to forcibly medicate me) because I do not like the outcome in a given situation.

Answer 3

Most of the time I believe that the victims of domestic violence are women. That is part of the problem. There is still a mentality that women bring it on themselves, but I truly like your idea of locking up the abuser. Meds are ineffective if not taken as prescribed.

Good ideas!

Answer 4

Probably because we don't consider violence as serious as sexual crimes...especially those against children. And the standards of 'domestic violence' tend to be rather broad...ranging from a hair tug to a fatal beating. Serial rape and child molestation (crimes most often resulting in 'mandatory psych lock up) are generally more specific and less ambiguously defined.