Weaponising Relationality? Judicial (Re)Interpretation of Loss of Control in Domestic Homicide Cases

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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Feminist Legal Studies
Published
2026-06-26
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10691-026-09612-8
Primary Topic
Intimate Partner and Family Violence
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Weaponising Relationality? Judicial (Re)Interpretation of Loss of Control in Domestic Homicide Cases

Sarah Singh, Anna Carline, Laurène Soubise, Matthew Gibson
Feminist Legal Studies
Intimate Partner and Family Violence
article

Weaponising Relationality? Judicial (Re)Interpretation of Loss of Control in Domestic Homicide Cases

Sarah Singh, Anna Carline, Laurène Soubise, Matthew Gibson
article en

Abstract

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.

Feminist Legal Studies
University of Leeds (GB), University of Liverpool (GB), University of Birmingham (GB)
Gender equality
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Intimate Partner and Family Violence
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Weaponising Relationality? Judicial (Re)Interpretation of Loss of Control in Domestic Homicide Cases — Sarah Singh, Anna Carline, et al. · Feminist Legal Studies (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS