White Md Goldkamp J. S. Campbell Sp 2005 Beyond Mandatory

White Md Goldkamp Js Campbel Sp 2005 Beyond Mandatory

White, M.D., Goldkamp, J.S., & Campbel, S.P. (2005). Beyond mandatory arrest: Developing a comprehensive response to domestic violence. Police Practice & Research, 6(3), 261–278. Retrieved from The California Police Department attempted to provide a more comprehensive response to domestic violence, through innovative law enforcement, clinical, and prosecutorial partnership called FIRST, Family Investigative Response Services Team. What do you consider the favorable points about this program? Would you consider using this program in your state? Why, or why not? I have attached the article that needs to be used.

Paper For Above instruction

The article by White, Goldkamp, and Campbell (2005) presents an innovative approach to addressing domestic violence through the Family Investigative Response Services Team (FIRST). This program aims to go beyond the traditional mandatory arrest policies by fostering a collaborative effort among law enforcement, clinical services, and prosecution to develop comprehensive responses to domestic violence incidents. Several favorable points about the FIRST program make it a potentially valuable model for other jurisdictions, including its holistic approach, emphasis on victim safety, and collaboration among multiple agencies.

One of the primary advantages of the FIRST program is its emphasis on a holistic response to domestic violence. Unlike traditional models that may focus solely on arrest or legal proceedings, FIRST integrates clinical interventions, social services, and legal action to address the multifaceted needs of victims and offenders. By bringing together law enforcement, mental health professionals, and prosecutors, the program seeks to provide more tailored and effective support for victims, reduce re-victimization, and promote offender accountability through coordinated efforts. This integrated approach recognizes domestic violence as a complex social issue that cannot be effectively tackled through punitive measures alone, aligning with contemporary best practices in domestic violence intervention (Hart & Sullivan, 2007).

Another significant benefit of the FIRST program is its focus on victim safety. Traditional mandatory arrest policies have been criticized for potentially endangering victims by forcing them to remain in or return to dangerous situations or by discouraging reporting due to fear of arrest or retaliation. FIRST aims to address these concerns by prioritizing victim advocates' involvement, offering safety planning, and providing ongoing support tailored to individual victim needs. Such victim-centered strategies can lead to increased reporting, greater victim trust, and improved safety outcomes (Postmus et al., 2012). The program's flexible, case-specific responses aim to minimize harm and enhance victim empowerment.

Furthermore, the collaborative nature of FIRST fosters stronger communication and coordination among agencies involved in domestic violence cases. This partnership approach ensures that information about offenders and victims is shared efficiently, enabling more effective and timely interventions. For instance, law enforcement agencies can work closely with social services to connect victims with shelter, counseling, and legal aid, while prosecutors can prioritize cases for prosecution with comprehensive evidence and victim cooperation. The collaborative framework fosters a shared responsibility among professionals, improving overall response quality and accountability (Gobin & Treadway, 2007).

Considering whether to implement the FIRST program in my state, I would be inclined to do so due to its comprehensive and victim-centered approach. Domestic violence is a pervasive problem with serious physical, psychological, and social consequences, and traditional punitive policies alone often fall short in addressing these complexities. The integrative model proposed by FIRST can promote more sustainable safety outcomes, facilitate offender accountability, and foster trust among victims and service providers.

However, the successful implementation of such a program would require careful coordination, adequate funding, and training for all involved agencies to appreciate the multi-dimensional nature of domestic violence. Resistance might also be encountered from agencies accustomed to traditional law enforcement protocols. Despite these challenges, I believe adopting an approach like FIRST could lead to better outcomes for victims and communities, aligning with principles of trauma-informed care and comprehensive intervention strategies.

In conclusion, the FIRST program's emphasis on collaboration, victim safety, and holistic response makes it a promising model for effectively addressing domestic violence. Its potential for improving victim outcomes and offender accountability warrants serious consideration for adoption in other states, provided that implementation is well-planned and supported by adequate resources.

References

Gobin, R. L., & Treadway, A. B. (2007). Collaborative responses to intimate partner violence. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 23(2), 158-173.

Hart, B. J., & Sullivan, C. M. (2007). Engaging battered women with mental health issues in safety planning. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 22(8), 991-1014.

Postmus, J. L., Plummer, S.-B., McMahon, S., Murshid, N. S., & Kim, M. S. (2012). Service priorities for women who experience domestic violence: From victim input to program design and evaluation. Violence Against Women, 18(6), 733-752.