Abstract The plight of women who kill their abuser was a key driver in abolishing provocation and introducing loss of control. However, it is increasingly documented that the partial defence to murder continues to aid violent men, while failing to assist abused women. Applying Nedelsky’s concept of relational autonomy, analysis of 117 appeal cases provides valuable insight into why reform aims have not been realised. Drawing upon intimate partner and familial abuse cases we explore how, in contrast to Nedelsky’s mobilisation, judicial interpretation allows relationality to be ‘weaponised’ in ways which undermine statutory reform, perpetuating gendered injustice. To conclude, we argue that Nedelsky’s relational approach necessitates the implementation of an ethical interpretative framework which acknowledges the gendered harms of the past. We introduce the notion of ‘recuperated relationality’ to highlight the need to reclaim relationality so that it can be ethically mobilised to foster a more progressive interpretation to gendered violence.
Carline et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: