Beyond risk theory: Experiential knowledge and ‘knowing otherwise’

The central purpose of this article is to trace the conflicting co-existence of three narratives in relation to the ‘risk society ’ and the practices that it engenders. The first of these narratives is theoretical: the problems and possibilities of the risk society thesis. The second is practical: how the concept of risk has been translated into policy and practice in the form of risk assessment tools for both ‘at risk ’ offenders and ‘at risk ’ victims. The focus in this narrative will be on criminal justice responses to violence in general with particular emphasis on responses to partner violence. The third narrative focuses on ‘real lives’: the experiential. Here attention will be paid to what is it that is, or is not, captured by the first two narratives. The concern will be to illustrate the extent to which the discordance that can be found between these three narratives reveals much about the risks of politics and the politics of risk. Keywords partner violence, real lives, risk, risk assessment In 2008/09, around three in four female victims (76%) knew the main or only suspect at the time of the offence, the same proportion as the previous year. However, a greater proportion of these female victims (69%) were killed by their partner, ex-partner or lover in 2008/09 compared with 2007/08 (50%). (Coleman and Osborne, 2010: 13) Risk is unequivocally used to mean danger from future damage, caused by the opponents. How much risk is a matter for the experts, but on both sides of the debate it has to be taken for granted that the matter is ascertainable. Anyone who insists that there is a high degree of uncertainty is taken to be opting out of accountability. (Douglas, 1990: 9