Conflict Resolution and Intimate Partner Violence: Promoting Peace, Respecting Procedural Rights, and Reducing Mass Incarceration
Institutional Affiliation
University of Oregon
Start Date
January 2026
End Date
January 2026
Proposal Type
Presentation
Proposal Format
On-campus
Proposal Description
One of the most important ways to strengthen a local community is to replace criminal prosecution with appropriate dispute resolution to the maximum extent possible. While ADR has won support in many contexts, criminal justice officials have historically been reluctant to extend ADR to cases involving intimate partner violence. The concern is that the imbalance of power in these cases makes ADR inappropriate, and that survivors of domestic violence would suffer further harm unless prosecutors imposed criminal sanctions on abusers. Scholars are beginning to challenge this traditional view. A growing concern about mass incarceration, coupled with research demonstrating the efficacy of ADR in domestic violence cases, could present an opportunity to modernize our dispute resolution procedures. My presentation will focus on the viability of ADR in three settings: pretrial diversion, victim-offender mediation, and post-conviction restorative justice. I will explain that when properly managed, ADR promotes peace, advances the interests of all parties, and protects procedural rights better than does the conventional criminal justice system. I will identify ethical boundaries for ADR that usually prevent the mistreatment of complainants and respondents. Recent research indicates that DV survivors favor the use of ADR procedures, and are more likely to report DV in jurisdictions that have adopted such procedures.
My presentation will draw from my extensive experience relating to this topic. Bonnie Campbell, the former director of the U.S. Violence Against Women Office, commended me as a "national leader in the prosecution of domestic violence." I have authored legislation addressing the unique challenges faced by survivors of intimate partner violence. In 2006, Senator Joseph Biden's staff invited me to participate in a work group advising the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on legislative reform in domestic violence cases, and I have testified before several states’ legislatures since that time. My research on domestic violence and sexual assault has been cited by the U.S. Supreme Court and nearly half of the states’ supreme courts, as well as by the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other media outlets. I have presented my scholarship at most of the top-50 law schools in the U.S. I have particular expertise in conflict resolution: I taught for a decade in the Master’s Program for Conflict Resolution, I practiced as a mediator, and I was involved in several ADR sessions that resolved criminal cases.
Conflict Resolution and Intimate Partner Violence: Promoting Peace, Respecting Procedural Rights, and Reducing Mass Incarceration
One of the most important ways to strengthen a local community is to replace criminal prosecution with appropriate dispute resolution to the maximum extent possible. While ADR has won support in many contexts, criminal justice officials have historically been reluctant to extend ADR to cases involving intimate partner violence. The concern is that the imbalance of power in these cases makes ADR inappropriate, and that survivors of domestic violence would suffer further harm unless prosecutors imposed criminal sanctions on abusers. Scholars are beginning to challenge this traditional view. A growing concern about mass incarceration, coupled with research demonstrating the efficacy of ADR in domestic violence cases, could present an opportunity to modernize our dispute resolution procedures. My presentation will focus on the viability of ADR in three settings: pretrial diversion, victim-offender mediation, and post-conviction restorative justice. I will explain that when properly managed, ADR promotes peace, advances the interests of all parties, and protects procedural rights better than does the conventional criminal justice system. I will identify ethical boundaries for ADR that usually prevent the mistreatment of complainants and respondents. Recent research indicates that DV survivors favor the use of ADR procedures, and are more likely to report DV in jurisdictions that have adopted such procedures.
My presentation will draw from my extensive experience relating to this topic. Bonnie Campbell, the former director of the U.S. Violence Against Women Office, commended me as a "national leader in the prosecution of domestic violence." I have authored legislation addressing the unique challenges faced by survivors of intimate partner violence. In 2006, Senator Joseph Biden's staff invited me to participate in a work group advising the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee on legislative reform in domestic violence cases, and I have testified before several states’ legislatures since that time. My research on domestic violence and sexual assault has been cited by the U.S. Supreme Court and nearly half of the states’ supreme courts, as well as by the New York Times, the Washington Post, and other media outlets. I have presented my scholarship at most of the top-50 law schools in the U.S. I have particular expertise in conflict resolution: I taught for a decade in the Master’s Program for Conflict Resolution, I practiced as a mediator, and I was involved in several ADR sessions that resolved criminal cases.