Becky Batagol

Enforcer, Manager or Leader? The Judicial Role in Family Violence Courts

Judicial supervision of offenders is an important component of many family violence courts. Skepticism concerning the ability of offenders to reform and a desire to protect victims has led to some judges to use supervision as a form of deterrence. Supervision is also used to hold offenders accountable for following court orders. Some family violence courts apply processes used in drug courts, such as rewards and sanctions, to promote offender rehabilitation. This article suggests that while protection and support of victims should be the prime concern of family violence courts, a form of judging that engages offenders in the development and implementation of solutions for their problems and supports their implementation is more likely to promote their positive behavioral change than other approaches to judicial supervision. The approach to judging proposed in this article draws from therapeutic jurisprudence, feminist theory, transformational leadership and solution-focused brief therapy principles.

Did you know : Citations, sources and references

Have you ever wanted a quick and dirty guide to the main principles underlying the methods and motives for correct use of footnotes and citations in law?

Measuring empathy in undergraduate law students: Examining the factorial validity of the Jefferson Scale of Empathy - Law Students (JSE-LS)

Several scholars have hypothesised a link between empathy and a range of important outcomes for law students including well-being, mental health and the development of effective client-lawyer relationships. However, few studies have examined these claims empirically. Empirical investigation of empathy among law students requires effective methods of measuring empathy. The present study sought to examine an instrument designed specifically to measure empathy among law students - the Jefferson Empathy Scale - Law Students (JSE-LS). The study involved examining the internal consistency and factor structure of the instrument using a sample of 276 Australian undergraduate law students. The study found that a four-factor solution was optimal for the dataset. Two of the factors were readily interpretable with previous literature, however the remaining two factors were unstable, suggesting the need for further revision of the instrument. Recommendations for revising the JSE-LS to better measure empathy are discussed.