Citation

Hubble G. Psychiatry Psychol. Law. 1999; 6(1): 51-56.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1999, Australian and New Zealand Association of Psychiatry, Psychology, and Law, Publisher Informa - Taylor and Francis Group)

DOI

10.1080/13218719909524947

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This article is a response to a recent article by Rebecca Bradfield "Is Near Enough Good Enough? Why Isn't Self‐Defence Appropriate for the Battered Woman?" which was published in Psychiatry, Psychology and Law (1998) Volume 5, page 71. Bradfield argues that the laws of self‐defence are failing women who commit homicide in the context of domestic violence, a claim that she supports by referring to the relatively infrequent use made of self‐defence in such cases in contrast to provocation. While Bradfield's discussion illuminates some important obstacles that battered women face in having their self‐defence claims assessed fairly by the criminal law, she fails to adequately explore the complexities of this issue, and the problems which our legal system faces in delivering the appropriate outcome in some cases where battered women kill.