Domestic Violence No-Contact Order (South Carolina, USA)
Problems addressed
Violence against women
Recidivism
Effectiveness

No Effect

.

.

.

.

.

No Effect

Want to know more about this classification? Check out our methodological manual.

Life periods served
Adults (18 to 59 years)
Where the program was applied
Residence / home
Country of application
United States
Description

This is a program that seeks to increase the effectiveness of protection measures in cases of domestic violence by proactively following up with women victims and restricting any type of contact by the aggressor.
The intervention consists of proactive contact by law enforcement officials (police officers, prosecutors, and judicial officers), in addition to the standard follow-up offered to women who have received protective measure orders, with the objectives of:
1) Ensuring that victims understand the purpose and requirements associated with no-contact measures by the offender.
2) Advising victims on how to collect evidence and mobilize law enforcement in the event of a rape.
3) Monitoring compliance with protection orders.
Victims can be followed up either at home or through telephone contact.

Impact evaluations

An impact evaluation found that, after six months of program follow-up, treatment had no effect on the frequency of rearrest or recidivism of offenders [1].
However, victims in the treatment group were more likely to know that the protection order was in place, had a higher level of contact with law enforcement and their advocates, and more frequently perceived contact with the offender as stalking or harassment [1].
The study had an experimental design with a total of 466 misdemeanor domestic violence cases (N = 237 in the treatment condition and N = 229 in the control condition) [1].

Bibliographic reference

[1] Brame, R., Kaukinen, C., Gover, A. R., & Lattimore, P. K. (2015). No-contact orders, victim safety, and offender recidivism in cases of misdemeanor criminal domestic violence: A randomized experiment. American journal of criminal justice, 40, 225-249. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12103-014-9242-x

Information source