Many defense attorneys, prosecutors, judges, and legislators have a very narrow view of “real” battered women due to their continued reliance on the battered women syndrome construct. As a result, battered women that fail to meet the standard of the syndrome end up serving long prison sentences, are unable to receive compensation for injuries they sustained, and have lost custody of their children. In the past, the battered woman syndrome has provided a mechanism for educating attorneys, judges, and juries about the ways in which the experience of battering impacts women’s perceptions, reactions, and decisions. But the syndrome contributed to an image of battered women as psychologically defective and diverted attention from the rational strategies of survival that women employ when they are in violent situations. The characterization of battered women as helpless reinforces conventional notions of femininity. Because most battered women are not passive or helpless, information about these stereotypes is most frequently used against them instead of in support of them. For many women, the perception that there is no escape from an abuser or no possibility of refusing his commands is not a psychological maladjustment but a realistic assessment. Advocacy and education must continue to resist pressures to define battered women as sick, deviant, or deficient without discounting the impact of intimate violence. The persistence of the battered woman syndrome as a construct is connected to social processes that are not easily altered. Individual behavior is considered the source of success and failure, and social change efforts have most often been aimed at the transformation of individuals rather than of social systems. These structural and cultural dynamics contribute to the persistence of the battered woman syndrome. Academic and advocacy work to change these perceptions must occur with efforts to transform the social, cultural, and economic processes that support violence against women. 4 notes, 23 references