Could a human have judged it better? Maybe not. I think a better question to ask is, "Should anyone be sent back into a violent domestic situation with no additional protection, no matter the calculated risk? And as someone who has been on the receiving end of that conversation, I would say no…no one should be told that, even though they were in a terrifying, life-threatening situation, they will not be provided protection, and no further steps will be taken to keep them from being injured again, or from being killed next time. But even without algorithms, that happens constantly…the only thing the algorithm accomplishes is that the investigator / social worker / etc doesn’t have to have any kind of personal connection with the victim, so they don’t have to feel some kind of way for giving an innocent person a death sentence because they were just doing what the computer told them to.
Final thought: When you pair this practice with the ongoing conversation around the legality of women seeking divorce without their husband’s consent, you have a terrifying and consistently deadly situation.
Vanth@reddthat.com 4 months ago
Louder for anyone in the back in the US thinking it doesn’t sound so bad when Republicans like Josh Hawley and JD Vance call for an end to no-fault divorces.
That’s right, one of our VP candidates wants to disallow people from divorcing their abusive partners without jumping through hoops that will take months if not years, and leaves them susceptible to their abusive partner, now even angrier than before that the victim would dare try to leave.
nalinna@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Yep. The ones who manage to slip notes to their veterinarian to help them get away are the exception.
dojan@lemmy.world 4 months ago
Reading stuff like this makes me sick. All is not well with the world.