NCJ Number
156128
Journal
Law and Society Review Volume: 28 Issue: 4 Dated: (1994) Pages: 787
Date Published
1994
Length
1 page
Annotation
Scheingold, Pershing, and Olson respond to comments (see NCJ-156126 and 156127) on their paper (see NCJ-156125), which attributed Washington State's Community Protection Act (CPA) of 1989 to the advocacy efforts of those who reflect the tenets of republican criminology and some feminists.
Abstract
The two papers that comment on the original article by Scheingold et al. were written by two representatives of republican criminology (Braithwaite and Pettit) and feminism (Daly). Both of these papers essentially share the view of Scheingold et al. about the flaws in the CPA and present positions that argue for strategies that address the causes of and effective remedies for offending. They criticize Scheingold et al. for ascribing CPA components to the concepts of republican criminology and some feminists. In responding to these comments, Scheingold et al. note that the two comments on their paper underscore the importance of "pushing beyond our case study and point to a variety of promising ways to determine the extent to which the problems we uncover in Washington are typical and/or idiosyncratic." They laud the important distinction introduced by Daly between grassroots victim-centered advocacy (which produced the CPA) and the victim advocacy of academic feminists (which focuses on the structural causes of violence against women). Scheingold et al. acknowledge that their focus was on victim- centered advocacy, since they saw no evidence that academic feminists played a role in the political activity that led to the CPA. 3 references