Is Near Enough Good Enough? Why Isn't Self-Defence Appropriate for the Battered Woman?

This article considers the application by the Australian courts of the defences of provocation and self‐defence to women who kill their abusive partners. Australian cases are examined to investigate the assertion that the courts tend to categorise the killing as raising the defence of provocation rather than self‐defence. It is argued, through reference to certain cases, that the practical reality is that the woman is often acting to protect her life or that of her children. The courts and the legislature in some Australian jurisdictions have been willing to expand the concept of provocation to give some recognition to the reality of the battered woman. The concerning aspect of this focus is that it diverts attention from the apparent reluctance of courts to accept the seriousness of domestic violence and the unwillingness of the courts to reconsider the application of the defence of self‐defence. This article considers the reasons for the courts reliance on provocation at the expense of self‐defence. © 1998 Taylor ‖ Francis Group, LLC.