Problems caused by the sanctity of the private sphere when dealing with domestic violence have long been the source of a good deal of writing and discussion. Kristin Kelly's book combines a very good summary and critique of classical political thought and modern theorizing about the public/private split with an empirical study. She then uses conclusions drawn from that study to construct a more complex model of the relationship between the public and the private, one that is more appropriate for the analysis of domestic violence. Her goal is to develop “an alternative approach to understanding and renegotiating public and private boundaries that more effectively balances familial and individual privacy with the need to reframe battery as a behavior subject to public sanction” (p. 84).

Kelly first traces the origins of the public/private dichotomy through classical formulations in Locke and Mill, pointing to the two different and inconsistent models in Locke's writing, depicting the demarcation as between the family and the state in his response to Filmer's argument in defense of monarchy, but between the individual and the state in the construction of the social contract. Both approaches leave the protection of women within the family to the patriarchal head of the household, clearly an inadequate remedy when he is their assailant.

Kelly then discusses a number of modern feminist critiques of the classical privacy paradigm and describes attempts by radical, conservative, and liberal feminists to reconceive the public/private split. Applying each theory to domestic violence as the touchstone, she concludes that all are inadequate and, in fact, that “it is not clear that the proposed reconstructions are any more capable than the classical liberal model of addressing the complex dilemmas present in instances of domestic violence” (p. 57).

After discussing the history of the legal treatment of domestic violence and describing some of the legal strategies that now exist, Kelly criticizes Second Wave feminism as having focused on the law and on obtaining remedies from the state. This criticism is only partly accurate, for feminists in the late 1960s and 1970s engaged in a good deal of community work as well—establishing shelters and advocacy groups and lobbying not only for legal change but also for other forms of assistance to victims. Nonetheless, her conclusion that law is limited in its effect on domestic violence is clearly right. Although national crime statistics show that since the adoption of such legal remedies as orders of protection and lawsuits against nonresponsive police, domestic violence in the United States has decreased (see, e.g., U.S. Dept. of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics, Violence by Intimates: Analysis of Data on Crimes by Current or Former Spouses, Boyfriends, and Girlfriends, 2000, pp. 1, 2–3), it still exists at unacceptable levels.

Up to this point, Domestic Violence and the Politics of Privacy tells a relatively old story, though one which is very skillfully reviewed. What is unique about Kelly's book is that she then follows the theoretical summary and critique with empirical work, interviewing persons who work in the domestic violence field—legal advocates, activists, policymakers, shelter workers, attorneys, and police officers—asking for their views on issues relating to privacy and domestic violence. From their responses, she concludes that legal intervention is an important but inadequate remedy, limited in ways that could be addressed (by the infusion of more public funds, for example) and limited because intervention via the legal system is too individualistic a response to a problem that is both multifaceted and, in many aspects, cultural in its scope. The persons interviewed instead emphasize a preventive approach to reducing domestic violence, involving extensive education, community participation, and coalitional work.

Combining her discussion of theory with these insights from practice, Kelly derives a new model for analyzing the private/public split and its impact—a triangular model instead of a binary one, with the family, the community (essentially the institutions of civil society), and the state forming the three points of the triangle, and the sides representing the boundaries. Thus, for example, the boundary between the state and the family is made up of structures such as search-and-seizure laws, due process rights, legislative mandates and programs, contracts, bureaucratic structures and rules, administrative law, police procedures, and physical barriers (p. 115). Yet the boundaries themselves are changing products of an ongoing democratic process (p. 162); they will shift and must be constantly reevaluated (p. 139). The advantages of this approach, Kelly says, include its emphasis on community participation and democracy and the encouragement of more links between public and private resources in the struggle against domestic violence. The new model also more adequately addresses the complex needs of victims—their economic and relational needs, for example, as well as their need for both public remedies and for privacy.

There are also problems with Kelly's new model. Most important, where does the individual appear in this triangle? Are there not both conflicts and boundaries between the individual and the family, the individual and the community, the individual and the state? While she explicitly recognizes the problems involved in conflating the individual and family in classical analysis and modern conservative feminism (p. 81), her model appears to repeat this error. Nonetheless, it is a substantial improvement on earlier conceptions in a number of ways. First, it highlights that the public/private relationship is neither binary nor a zero sum game. Second, her model includes nonstate groups as actors in the campaign against domestic violence. Third, and perhaps most important, it emphasizes that addressing domestic violence requires a multifaceted approach, involving different points of entry and a variety of players and programs, including community education, group advocacy and support, and differing approaches designed to fit the needs of diverse communities.