94 research outputs found
Offer, minne, och utsatthet [Elektronisk resurs] : diskurser om alkohol i våldtäkts- och misshandelsmål
No full textThe alcohol consumption of female rape victims is often discussed during rape trials. This has been regarded as an emblematic example of victim blaming and the failures of the legal system in relation to rape. From a feminist perspective it can be seen as an expression of the structural subordination of women in society in general.This article investigates the meanings attached to alcohol in written court decisions in Swedish rape trials (2008-2012). Rape trials are contrasted with assault trials, where the complainants are men. Thirty court decisions from each type of trial are compared, with the same number of guilty and not-guilty verdicts.Quantitative analysis reveals that alcohol consumption is mentioned more often in rape trials, where it also appears more relevant to decision-making. The complainants' consumption is mentioned four times more often than the defendants' consumption. In assault decisions, the mentioning of alcohol consumption is distributed roughly equally between the parties. The analysis shows how a large proportion of the alcohol references in both rape trials and assault trials can be regarded as largely irrelevant noise. The remaining alcohol references are understood in terms of five interpretative repertoires: 1) the accuracy of memory on part of witnesses; 2) explanations of seemingly irrational behaviors; 3) vulnerability, 4) getting the victim drunk, and 5) moral character. The latter three interpretive repertoires are more common in rape decisions. As a conclusion, part of the preoccupation with rape victims’ alcohol consumption can be attributed to protectionary strategies, and should thus not be regarded as victim-blaming. However, some assessments appear to build on assumptions that information about alcohol consumption is indicative to moral character that is relevant to court decisions. Hur våldtäktsmål och våldtäktsoffer hanteras är en ständigt aktuell fråga, som nyligen föranledde ytterligare en statlig offentlig utredning (SOU 2016:60). I denna artikel har Maritha Jacobsson och Stefan Sjöström undersökt hur alkohol relateras till i våldtäktsdomar, och jämfört detta med misshandelsdomar. De konstaterar att alkoholkonsumtion ibland kan hjälpa till att få en fällande dom, medan det i andra fall blir till en nackdel för den målsägande.</p
Offer, minne, och utsatthet : diskurser om alkohol i våldtäkts- och misshandelsmål
No full textThe alcohol consumption of female rape victims is often discussed during rape trials. This has been regarded as an emblematic example of victim blaming and the failures of the legal system in relation to rape. From a feminist perspective it can be seen as an expression of the structural subordination of women in society in general. This article investigates the meanings attached to alcohol in written court decisions in Swedish rape trials (2008-2012). Rape trials are contrasted with assault trials, where the complainants are men. Thirty court decisions from each type of trial are compared, with the same number of guilty and not-guilty verdicts. Quantitative analysis reveals that alcohol consumption is mentioned more often in rape trials, where it also appears more relevant to decision-making. The complainants' consumption is mentioned four times more often than the defendants' consumption. In assault decisions, the mentioning of alcohol consumption is distributed roughly equally between the parties. The analysis shows how a large proportion of the alcohol references in both rape trials and assault trials can be regarded as largely irrelevant noise. The remaining alcohol references are understood in terms of five interpretative repertoires: 1) the accuracy of memory on part of witnesses; 2) explanations of seemingly irrational behaviors; 3) vulnerability, 4) getting the victim drunk, and 5) moral character. The latter three interpretive repertoires are more common in rape decisions. As a conclusion, part of the preoccupation with rape victims’ alcohol consumption can be attributed to protectionary strategies, and should thus not be regarded as victim-blaming. However, some assessments appear to build on assumptions that information about alcohol consumption is indicative to moral character that is relevant to court decisions. Hur våldtäktsmål och våldtäktsoffer hanteras är en ständigt aktuell fråga, som nyligen föranledde ytterligare en statlig offentlig utredning (SOU 2016:60). I denna artikel har Maritha Jacobsson och Stefan Sjöström undersökt hur alkohol relateras till i våldtäktsdomar, och jämfört detta med misshandelsdomar. De konstaterar att alkoholkonsumtion ibland kan hjälpa till att få en fällande dom, medan det i andra fall blir till en nackdel för den målsägande.Diskriminerar rättssystemet kvinnliga brottsoffer? Trovärdighet hos kvinnliga och manliga brottsoffer (Brottsoffermyndigheten
Offer, minne, och utsatthet : diskurser om alkohol i våldtäkts- och misshandelsmål
No full textThe alcohol consumption of female rape victims is often discussed during rape trials. This has been regarded as an emblematic example of victim blaming and the failures of the legal system in relation to rape. From a feminist perspective it can be seen as an expression of the structural subordination of women in society in general.This article investigates the meanings attached to alcohol in written court decisions in Swedish rape trials (2008-2012). Rape trials are contrasted with assault trials, where the complainants are men. Thirty court decisions from each type of trial are compared, with the same number of guilty and not-guilty verdicts.Quantitative analysis reveals that alcohol consumption is mentioned more often in rape trials, where it also appears more relevant to decision-making. The complainants' consumption is mentioned four times more often than the defendants' consumption. In assault decisions, the mentioning of alcohol consumption is distributed roughly equally between the parties. The analysis shows how a large proportion of the alcohol references in both rape trials and assault trials can be regarded as largely irrelevant noise. The remaining alcohol references are understood in terms of five interpretative repertoires: 1) the accuracy of memory on part of witnesses; 2) explanations of seemingly irrational behaviors; 3) vulnerability, 4) getting the victim drunk, and 5) moral character. The latter three interpretive repertoires are more common in rape decisions. As a conclusion, part of the preoccupation with rape victims’ alcohol consumption can be attributed to protectionary strategies, and should thus not be regarded as victim-blaming. However, some assessments appear to build on assumptions that information about alcohol consumption is indicative to moral character that is relevant to court decisions. Hur våldtäktsmål och våldtäktsoffer hanteras är en ständigt aktuell fråga, som nyligen föranledde ytterligare en statlig offentlig utredning (SOU 2016:60). I denna artikel har Maritha Jacobsson och Stefan Sjöström undersökt hur alkohol relateras till i våldtäktsdomar, och jämfört detta med misshandelsdomar. De konstaterar att alkoholkonsumtion ibland kan hjälpa till att få en fällande dom, medan det i andra fall blir till en nackdel för den målsägande.</p
Experience of guilt in court hearings : Comparing rape, assault and fraud cases
No full textFeelings of guilt often occur when people are subjected to crime. In this study, guilt is defined as a moral and emotional category, as opposed to the legal guilt. The aim of this study was to investigate how crime victims related to feelings of guilt in the court process. Interviews with plaintiffs in rape cases (10) have been compared to interviews with plaintiffs in assault (10) and fraud cases (10) in order find out if there are differences in the perceptions of guilt for each type of crime. The interviews are analysed by discursive psychology and three interpretative repertoires have been identified: self-blaming, guilt imposed and guilt resistance. The results show that plaintiffs in rape cases expressed more feelings of being guilt-imposed compared to plaintiffs in fraud and assault cases. Some plaintiffs in the rape cases describe how they actively opposed what they perceived was guilty-imposed practices in court.Relationen mellan skuldupplevelse och skuldbeläggande i domstolsförhandlingar - en jämförande studie av våldtäkt, misshandel och bedräger
Två psykiatrinätverk för evidensbaserad kunskapsanvändning - tidigt omhändertagande vid psykos och ADHD/autismspektrumtillstånd : Delrapport
No full text
Terapeutens rätt : rättslig och terapeutisk logik i domstolsförhandlingar
No full textIn this dissertation, I explore a quite unique legal situation, namely administrative court hearings relating to coercive interventions: the Care of Young Persons Act (LVU), Care of Abusers (Special Provisions) Act (LVM), and the Compulsory Psychiatric Care Act (LPT). There are three central participatory roles in the court hearings: The official party is the authority who files the application for coercive intervention – either a chief psychiatrist or a social welfare board (typically represented by a social worker or sometimes a lawyer assisted by a social worker), whereas the citizen party is the person about whom the application is brought. The citizen party is represented by a legal representative. The professionals represent two different logics: therapeutic and judicial. The purpose of this dissertation has been to study the tension between therapeutic and judicial logic in court hearings relating to compulsory care. With theoretical concepts from Scott (1995) and Wetherell & Potter (1998), it is possible to say that the therapeutic and judicial logics are built up by institutional elements that are communicated through interpretative repertoires. Three questions are central: 1. How do professional participators handle the different role expectations embedded in therapeutic and judicial logic? In this case, I am particularly interested in role conflicts faced by social workers and psychiatrists. 2. How do different institutional elements (regulative, normative/cognitive) play out in the court hearings? 3. To what extent can these court hearings be considered a scrutinizing order of discourse, where the arguments of official party are subjected to critical examination? In my analysis I am inspired by both critical discourse analysis and organizational theory, more precisely, new institutionalism. These two perspectives provide useful insights and make it possible to combine the micro- and macro levels in the analysis. Data for the analysis consist of 43 court hearings and 31 interviews, gathered from two different county administrative courts in Sweden. All written documents used and produced by the courts are also part of our data. The dissertation consists of five studies that indicate that the court hearings hardly can be described as a scrutinising order of discourse. In spite of this, the court constantly finds that the legal criteria for coercive intervention are satisfied. Neither the official party nor the legal representative argue according to a judicial logic. Instead, therapeutic logic dominates the order of discourse. When the arguments for compulsory care are therapeutic, they are not explicitly related to the criteria in the law. In my interpretation, the reason why the conflict between therapeutic and judicial logic is not realised can be found in the existence of a logic of normalisation. This ideological logic of normalisation can be found in most of the institutions in the Swedish society and are built on the idea of traditional welfare norms
Terapeuten som motpart : Hur socialsekreterare och psykiatrer kommunicerar som offentlig part i domstolsförhandlingar i mål om tvångsvård
No full text
- …
