Inaccessible to women – the general defences of duress and self defence

This chapter will consider and summarise the defences of self-defence, duress by threats, (duress of circumstance) and loss of self-control manslaughter. Despite the recognition, at least by some, that these defences in their drafting and interpretation yield to masculinist and heteronormative assumptions and are no longer fit for purpose, the law and legal actors continue to claim equality of access whilst delivering injustice. Each of these defences will be dissected and focus will rest on the substantive provisions and on those elements of interpretation which rely on extra-legal construction of fluid concepts by judges who for example apply their ‘common sense’ and jurors for example determine whether conduct is reasonable in the circumstances. It will be argued that doctrinal provisions and quasi-legal constructs used to test and weigh culpability such as ‘reasonableness’, ‘no realistic alternative’, ‘necessary’, ‘proportionate’, ‘common sense’ are overdetermined by gender assumptions. Failed reform efforts will be analysed.