Researcher(s)
- Margaret Livingstone, Women and Gender Studies, University of Delaware
Faculty Mentor(s)
- Angela Hattery, Women and Gender Studies, University of Delaware
Abstract
Protection From Abuse (PFA) orders are a form of civil judicial relief for victims of domestic violence in the State of Delaware that grant protections to victims. For example, a PFA may require the respondent (the person against whom there is a PFA) to stay a minimum of 100 yards from the party petitioning. PFA petitions can be resolved either through the required mediation session with a Family Court mediator prior to any possible trial or through adjudicating the petition at trial. However, even though PFA petitions are judicial actions, an overwhelming majority of litigants come with no legal representation, otherwise known as pro se. Thus we focused our court observations to determine the degree to which a lack of representation impacted the outcome of a PFA trial. Current research indicates that petitioners utilizing domestic violence specialty courts who do not have an attorney tend to have disparate outcomes compared to their counterparts with attorneys, mainly due to their lack of expertise in knowing how to structure their case. Our observations confirmed this finding; many litigants we observed came to court unprepared with all necessary, tangible evidence the court can utilize in coming to a decision, or lack the relevant knowledge to even know what and how to exactly phrase and to structure their case. But what if a pro se litigant did show up prepared and were able to present the court with a more temporarily timed narrative explaining why they need a PFA? Our findings indicate that reforms to the mediation experience of litigants and how commissioners engage with pro se litigants has the potential to shift litigants’ experiences to be more positive when engaging with the courts, and have outcomes that bring their abuse to justice.