|
Batterer
Programs:
What Criminal Justice Agencies Need to Know
Title:
Batterer Programs: What Criminal Justice Agencies Need to Know. Series: Research
in Action Author: Kerry Murphy Healey and Christine Smith Published: July 1998
Subject: Domestic violence 25 pages 60,000 bytes
http://www.ncjrs.org/txtfiles/171683.txt
-------------------------------
Figures, charts, forms, and tables are not included in this ASCII plain-text
file. To view this document in its entirety, download the Adobe Acrobat graphic
file available from this Web site or order a print copy from NCJRS at
800-851-3420.
-------------------------------
U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs
National Institute of Justice Jeremy Travis, Director
Research in Action
Batterer Programs: What Criminal Justice Agencies Need to Know
by Kerry Murphy Healey and Christine Smith
-------------------------------
Highlights
Batterer intervention programs were originally established in the late 1970s as
feminists and others called attention to the victimization of women through
domestic violence, grassroots programs sprang up, and service providers
recognized that the offenders' behavior needed to be addressed. The requirement
that batterers attend intervention programs as a condition of probation or as
part of pretrial or diversion is fast becoming a part of the response to
domestic violence in many jurisdictions. However, judges and probation officers
often lack basic information about program
goals and methods.
This report, a summary of the full-length study, attempts to meet that need by
presenting information about batterer intervention programs operating throughout
the country. The interventions described were selected to represent the range of
programming available and include the established or "mainstream"
programs as well as innovative approaches.
o All programs are structurally similar, proceeding from intake through
assessment, victim contact, group treatment, and completion, but each program is
based on one of several theoretical approaches to domestic violence. Most of the
pioneers in intervention use the feminist model, which attributes the problem to
societal values that legitimate male control. This model, exemplified in the
"Duluth Curriculum," uses education and skills building to resocialize
batterers. The less common family systems interventions, based on the notion
that violent behavior stems from dysfunctional family interactions, emphasize
building communication skills within the family. Psychotherapeutic and
cognitive-behavioral interventions are based on the belief that domestic
violence is related to the offender's psychological problems and, as a result,
emphasize therapy and counseling. The EMERGE and AMEND models represent a blend
of the feminist educational approach with more indepth and intensive group work.
o Increased awareness of the diversity of the batterer population has given rise
to the belief that more specialized approaches are needed. One trend reflects
the idea that interventions should be based on various typologies or categories
of batterers. Of these, the typologies that group offenders by their
psychological factors may be less useful for criminal justice purposes than
those that do so by degree of risk for dropping out or reoffending. Other
specialized approaches are designed to enhance program retention of specific
populations based on sociocultural characteristics such as poverty, race,
ethnicity, nationality, gender, or sexual orientation.
o Batterer intervention programs cannot deter domestic violence unless they are
supported by the criminal justice system. Criminal justice responses to domestic
violence can be coordinated to support batterer intervention. For example, the
integrated criminal justice responses studied for this report included
coordination among agencies; use of victim advocates throughout the system;
designation of special, dedicated batterer intervention units; and provision of
training for agency personnel. Probation officers have a key role as the
critical link between the justice system and batterer interventions.
-------------------------------
In the late 1970s, activists working with battered women realized that although
they might help individual victims, no real progress could be made in reducing
the problem of domestic violence unless steps were taken to reform perpetrators
and challenge the cultural and legal supports for battering. Batterer
intervention programs were established as a first step in changing offenders'
behavior and increasing awareness of the problem. For their part, criminal
justice agencies have responded by referring an increasing number of batterers
to these programs, through pretrial or diversion programs or as part of
sentencing.
Although requiring batterers to participate in programs to deter further
violence is fast becoming an integral part of the response to domestic violence
in many jurisdictions, judges and probation officers may lack sufficient
information about the content and structure of these local programs and their
goals and methods. In addition, the complexity of State guidelines and standards
for batterer programs and the seriousness of the ongoing threat to battered
women when offenders' cases are mishandled suggest the need for criminal justice
professionals to be knowledgeable about the types of interventions available.
This report is intended to bridge the information gap and thereby enable
criminal justice professionals to make informed choices among programs and
communicate more effectively with program providers. Program staff should find
the report useful as an explanation of the constraints faced by the criminal
justice system, its procedures, and its underlying goals--to protect victims and
to deter reoffending. In this way, the information should help staff to better
align their program practice with criminal justice expectations.
After exploring the nature and causes of domestic violence, the report describes
the batterer interventions currently in operation--the larger,
"mainstream" programs as well as innovative interventions being
explored--examines the theories on which they are based, reviews the most
critical issues being debated, and examines criminal justice practices that can
improve batterer intervention. The information was obtained from observation of
several batterer intervention programs; interviews with program directors,
criminal justice professionals, and academics; and extensive review of
documents. (See "Sources of Information for the Study.")
The nature and impact of domestic violence
Although the legal definition of battering varies from State to State, many
intervention providers explain it as a constellation of physical, sexual, and
psychological abuses that may include physical violence, intimidation, threats,
emotional abuse, isolation, sexual abuse, manipulation, using the children as
pawns, economic coercion, and the assertion of male privilege.[1] Only some of
these behaviors--most commonly, physical and sexual assault--are illegal in and
of themselves.
The cost of domestic violence to society and to the victims is immense.
Battering results in physical and psychological injury and sometimes even death;
prenatal injuries; physical and psychological harm to children exposed to
violence; increased homelessness among women and children; higher health care
costs; and corresponding increases in the demands for social, medical, and
criminal justice services. Much of the toll is not calculated because, in the
estimate of some researchers, as many as six in seven domestic assaults go
unreported.[2]
Who batters? Although similar proportions of men and women admit to engaging in
violence against their partner,[3] the majority of batterers arrested are
heterosexual men.[4] Prosecutors and probation officers interviewed estimated
that between 5 and 15 percent are women, although many are thought to be
"self-defending victims" who have been mistakenly arrested as primary
or mutual aggressors.[5] A small percentage of those arrested for battering are
gay or lesbian.
Efforts to identify key demographic, psychological, and criminal characteristics
of men who batter have led some researchers to propose profiles or
"typologies" of these men. These tools could help criminal justice
professionals and service providers better predict the level of danger and the
potential of batterers for reoffending, as well as match batterers with
specialized forms of intervention.
Who are the victims? The victims of battering are disproportionately women. In a
single recent year, almost 1 million women, in contrast to 148,000 men, were
victimized by intimates (boyfriend, girlfriend, spouse, or ex-spouse).[6] A
similar disproportionality holds for murders attributed to intimates: in three
of every four instances, the victim was female.[7]
Race is one of the factors that determine the chances a woman will be the victim
of intimate violence. African-American women are more likely than women of other
races to be victimized, as are women who live in urban areas.[8] Intimate
victimization affects younger women (ages 16-24) most frequently.[9] Moreover,
the classlessness of domestic violence is a myth, because victims also tend to
be poor, with family incomes under $7,000.[10] It may be, however, that
victimization of lower income women is more likely to be reported to the police,
since women with higher incomes and more status in the community have the
resources to deal with domestic violence privately without involving the
criminal justice system.[11]
Domestic violence is also associated with low marriage rates, high unemployment,
and social problems,[12] and, according to the intervention providers
interviewed for this report, women in cross-cultural relationships may also be
at unusually high risk.[13] The last factor may be due to cultural differences
in expectations about sex roles and acceptable behavior.
What works to stop battering?
Although some evaluations of batterer interventions have been conducted,
researchers concur that the majority of these studies are inconclusive because
of methodological problems.[14] Among the few considered methodologically sound,
the majority have found modest but statistically significant reductions in
recidivism among men participating in batterer interventions. Frustration with
the lack of empirical evidence favoring one curriculum or length of treatment
has led some researchers increasingly to look at batterers as a diverse group
for whom specially tailored interventions may be the only effective approach.
At the same time, the question of how to evaluate batterer interventions may
need to be reframed to include the broader context of criminal justice support.
Even if research identifies the perfect match between interventions and
offenders, criminal justice and community support will have a crucial impact on
the effort's success. Research by Edward Gondolf, who is evaluating four sites
in a study sponsored by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, points
to the importance of systemwide assessments of batterer intervention.[15]
Gondolf is particularly concerned about the often long delay between arrest and
enrollment in a program. Systemwide evaluation could answer the question of
whether the speed of the criminal justice response and program enrollment is
more important than either program content or length.
The causes of domestic violence
The origins of domestic violence are the subject of intense debate. More than in
most other fields, in disciplines and professions dealing with domestic violence
the theoretical debate affects practice. Each of the three categories of
domestic violence theory locates the causes differently: in society and culture
(the feminist or profeminist model), in the family (the family systems or
interactional model), or in the individual (the psychotherapeutic or
cognitive-behavioral model). In the past two decades, a number of practitioners
representing specific, divergent theoretical camps have begun to move toward a
more integrated, "multidimensional" model of batterer intervention to
better address the complexity of the problem. Very rarely do batterer programs
reflect a single theory of domestic violence. Among the programs studied for
this report, the majority combine elements of different theoretical models.When
criminal justice professionals work with batterer intervention providers, they
will find it useful to understand the primary theory of domestic violence that
the particular program espouses. It is also useful to understand the content of
the intervention programs, which may draw on two or more theories. The mix of
types leads experts to caution criminal justice agencies against uncritically
accepting an eclectic curriculum and to aim for a coherent approach.
Major theories and related interventions
Because the three categories of theories dominating the field offer divergent
explanations of the root causes of battering, they produce distinct intervention
models with different strategies.
Feminist approaches. Batterer intervention programs were started in the 1970s
when feminists and others brought public attention to the problem of domestic
violence and grass- roots services began to be established in response. The
feminist perspective has influenced most batterer intervention programs. Central
to the perspective is a gender analysis of power,[16] which holds that domestic
violence mirrors the patriarchal organization of society. In this view, violence
is one means of maintaining male power in the family. Feminist programs, which
attempt to raise consciousness about society's sex-role conditioning and how it
constrains men's behavior, present a model of egalitarian relationships based on
trust instead of fear.
Support for the feminist analysis comes from the observation that most
batterers, when "provoked" by someone more powerful than they, are
able to control their anger and avoid resorting to violence. Further support
comes from research showing that batterers are less secure in their masculinity
than nonbatterers and from studies documenting the sense of entitlement
batterers feel in controlling their partners' behavior.[17]
Critics claim the feminist perspective overemphasizes sociocultural factors to
the exclusion of traits in the individual, such as growing up abused.[18] In
their view, feminist theory predicts that all men will be abusive. Other
criticisms hold that feminist educational interventions are too confrontational
and as a result self-defeating because they alienate batterers, increase their
hostility, and make them less likely to enter treatment. Another concern,
revealed in some evaluations, is that the education central to the feminist
program may transmit information but not deter violent behavior.
The family systems model. This model regards the problem behaviors of
individuals as a manifestation of a dysfunctional family, with each family
member contributing to the problem. Both partners may contribute to the
escalation of conflict, with each striving to dominate the other. In this view,
either partner may resort to violence. Intervention involves improving
communication and conflict resolution skills, which both partners can develop.
It focuses on solving the problem rather than identifying the causes.
Of particular concern to feminist and cognitive-behavioral proponents is the
format of couples counseling espoused in the family systems model. They believe
it can put the victim at risk if she expresses complaints, prevents a frank
exchange between counselor and victim, and is conducive to victim-blaming. For
these reasons, couples counseling is expressly prohibited in 20 State standards
and guidelines for batterer intervention. (For a summary of what these standards
cover, see "State Standards for Service Providers.")
Psychotherapeutic approaches. These perspectives, which focus on the individual,
hold that personality disorders or early traumatic life experiences predispose
some people to violence.[19] Being physically abusive is seen as symptomatic of
an underlying emotional problem, which may be traced to parental abuse,
rejection, and failure to meet a child's dependence needs.
From this perspective, two forms of batterer intervention--individual and group
psychodynamic therapy and cognitive-behavioral group therapy-- have evolved. The
former involves uncovering the batterer's unconscious problem and resolving it
consciously. Although a recent study revealed that the approach retained a
higher percentage of men in treatment than did a feminist/cognitive-behavioral
intervention,[20] critics fault psychodynamic therapy for not explaining what
can be done to stop the behavior, allowing the behavior to continue until the
underlying problem is solved,[21] and ignoring the cultural acceptability of
male dominance.
The cognitive-behavioral approach focuses on the conscious rather than the
unconscious and the present rather than the past to help batterers function
better by modifying how they think and behave. The approach is compatible with a
criminal justice response, simply addressing the violent acts and attempting to
change them, without trying to solve larger issues of social inequality or delve
into deep-seated psychological problems. Feminists fault the approach for
failing to explain why many batterers are not violent in other relationships.
Pioneering programs and their models
Many of the larger, more established batterer intervention programs are based on
the Duluth Curriculum. Other pioneers in batterer intervention, EMERGE and
AMEND, share the Duluth Curriculum's basic structure but depart slightly from
Duluth in technique and focus. All three of these long-established batterer
interventions include a feminist educational approach and, to varying degrees,
incorporate cognitive-behavioral techniques.
No single theoretical intervention model has yet proved more effective than any
other in reducing recidivism.[22] For this reason, many program directors and
criminal justice professionals stress structure over content. They believe that
regardless of a program's philosophy or methods, any responsible intervention
can help contain batterers' abuse by closely monitoring behavior. Thus it is
important to highlight the common structural elements (procedures) of the
programs studied for this report.
Program procedures. Program procedures used by all mainstream programs consist
of intake and assessment, victim contact, orientation, group treatment
(discussed in the section on "Program content," below), leaving the
program, and completion.
Intake and assessment. The batterer's first contact with the program occurs when
he arranges for an intake interview. First contact with program staff may occur
at the courthouse, following contact with a probation officer. In a number of
jurisdictions, however, it is the responsibility of the batterer to initiate
program and probation contact. Intake assessment, which may last up to 8 weeks,
is designed to convince the client to agree to the terms of the intervention,
begin the behavior assessment, and screen for other problems. Ideally, the
initial session begins to foster rapport between the clinician and the batterer.
Not all batterers are accepted at intake. The most common reason for denying
service is that the batterer is part of a group that another program can serve
better. For example, batterers who are found to have other problems (such as
substance abuse or mental illness) may be referred elsewhere or to a program
that addresses these issues in an integrated format. Another common reason for
nonacceptance is unwillingness or inability to pay, although some programs offer
assistance to those who cannot afford the intake fee and a sliding scale for
payments. Some programs consider batterers inappropriate for treatment if they
deny having committed violence. Apart from information gathering and initial
instruction in program rules, overcoming denial is the primary task of intake.
Victim contact. A number of States require that partners be notified at various
points in the intervention, and programs with a strong advocacy policy typically
contact the partner every 2 or 3 months. Assessments and monitoring often
involve separate interviews with the victim to obtain additional information
about the relationship. Contacting the victim when the batterer enters the
program ensures that she receives accurate information about program goals and
methods, can raise her awareness of her situation, and provides her the
opportunity to obtain help with safety planning. As part of the ongoing
lethality assessment, the batterer's counselor will inform the victim and the
probation officer if further abuse is imminent.
Raising the victim's awareness is a key component of victim contact. Just as
important, however, is guarding her against false hope that the program can
guarantee her partner will change. This caution needs to be balanced against
respect for the victim's right to make her own decision, even if that involves
remaining with the batterer.
Orientation. The assessment process continues during orientation, the initial
phase of group intervention. New clients meet together for one or more sessions
during which the reeducation process begins; at the same time, counselors more
accurately appraise the extent of the batterer's problem. Orientation also
establishes rapport between participants and counselors that can reduce the
former's defensiveness. In this phase, program goals and rules for participating
in the group are spelled out, and batterers are taught the program's underlying
assumptions.
Orientation sessions tend to be more didactic than later sessions, which may
take on more of a therapeutic tone. Their lecture format is intended to maintain
order and avoid digression, as well as to establish norms for participation that
can be carried over to the more informal groups. In the orientation sessions,
counselors make clear that active participation is required.
Leaving the program. Batterers leave the program either because they complete it
successfully or are asked to leave. Programs are cautious about terminating a
batterer before completion because of the potential danger early release may
pose to the victim. However, there are a number of reasons for termination,
among them noncooperation, nonpayment of fees, or revocation of parole or
probation. The most common reason for the threat of termination is not attending
group sessions regularly. Another is violating crucial program rules (for
example, being disruptive or aggressive).
Before resorting to termination, a warning may be issued or the batterer may be
required to begin the program again. When clients do not attend sessions, or
when clients with substance abuse problems fail to maintain sobriety, the
probation officer may be informed.
Completion. Some programs have specific exit criteria that must be met before
completion, such as requiring that the batterer write a "responsibility
letter" acknowledging his behavior and read it to the group. In defining
completion, some programs distinguish between mere attendance and the
accomplishment of intervention goals. Either way, with court-mandated clients
the final report to probation indicates whether the client has worked
successfully in the program. Completion rates, however, tend to be low.[23] Some
programs offer followup or aftercare for clients who complete the program
successfully.
Program content. Depending on the type of program, the intervention consists of
either a set educational curriculum or less structured discussions centered on
relationships, anger management skills, or group psychotherapy. The group
therapy modality is the intervention of choice.[24]
Of the three mainstream program models, the Duluth Curriculum uses a classroom
format to focus on issues of power and control. Violence is viewed as linked to
male power and control, and the development of critical thinking skills is
emphasized to help batterers understand and change their behavior. By contrast,
the two other mainstream models--EMERGE
and AMEND--include more indepth counseling and are longer term. As with the
Duluth Curriculum, reeducation and skills building are part of these models, but
their founders hold that psychoeducational approaches alone do not address the
full problem. Thus, EMERGE and AMEND combine cognitive-behavioral techniques
with confrontational group processes that force the batterer to accept
responsibility for his behavior.
The Duluth Curriculum
Many batterer intervention programs adhere to, or borrow from, a
psychoeducational and skills-building curriculum that is a component of the
Duluth model developed in the early 1980s by the Domestic Abuse Intervention
Project of Duluth, Minnesota. The model places battering within a broader
context of a range of controlling tactics such as intimidation, coercion,
threats, and social isolation[25] and emphasizes the importance of a coordinated
community response to the problem.
The preset curriculum is taught in classes that emphasize the development of
critical thinking skills around several themes, including nonviolence, respect,
support, trust, partnership, and negotiation. Two or three sessions are spent on
each theme. For each theme, the first session begins with a video demonstration
of the specific controlling behavior being highlighted. Discussion centers on
the actions used by the batterer depicted in the demonstration to control his
partner. During subsequent sessions devoted to the theme, each group member
describes his own use of the controlling behavior. Alternative behaviors are
then explored.
EMERGE
EMERGE, of Cambridge, Massachusetts, begins intervention with an orientation
phase consisting of educational and skills-building sessions. Clients who
complete this phase and admit to domestic violence graduate to an ongoing group
that blends cognitive-behavioral techniques with group therapy centered on
accountability. The approach is more flexible and interactive than that of
programs based on the Duluth model, which uses a preset curriculum.
The programs begin with a long "check-in" conducted in the group
session led by a facilitator. New members introduce themselves, describe the
incident that brought them to the program, and admit their violence. They are
then asked questions that elicit details about the acts of violence they
committed. Short check-ins for regular group members follow, centering on their
actions of the previous week. There may then be discussion of incidents
disclosed by a group member during check-in.
EMERGE focuses on the broader relationship between the batterer and the
victim--not simply the abusive behavior. One technique promoting this approach
is to require that a client refer to his partner by her first name rather than
by her relationship to him (e.g., "my wife") to avoid perceiving her
as an object or possession. Each client develops goals that address his favored
control tactics, such as behavior signifying extreme jealousy. In establishing
the goals, the partner's concerns are incorporated, and the group helps the
client develop ways to address these concerns.
AMEND
AMEND aims to establish client accountability, increase awareness of the social
context of battering, and build new skills. Its group therapists use the Duluth
cognitive-behavioral techniques, but whereas the ordinary therapy group might
try to support the client and help him express his feelings, AMEND group leaders
serve as "moral guides" who take directive, value-laden positions--in
particular, a firm stand against violence.
AMEND's long-term approach has four stages. The first two consist of several
months of education and confrontation intended to break through the batterer's
denial. The third stage follows with several months of advanced group therapy in
which the batterer begins to recognize his own rationalizations for his abusive
behavior and to admit the truth.
Ongoing contacts with the partner are important, because they may be able to
reveal relapses or more subtle forms of abuse. The last phase of recovery for
those in the advanced group is the beginning of real change. Because this is a
difficult time for the client, the group process takes on a more supportive
tone. As the client prepares to end therapy, he is encouraged at this, the third
stage, to develop a plan that includes a support network to avoid future
violence. The fourth and final stage (an optional stage that few men enter)
consists of involvement in community service and political action to stop
domestic violence.
Current trends and innovations
Practitioners and academics have long been concerned that "one size fits
all" intervention is neither effective nor appropriate for the diverse
population of batterers. To accommodate diversity, two categories of program
refinements are emerging from practitioners' innovations and cooperative field
research: those tailored to specific types of batterers ("batterer
typologies"), based on psychological profiles or criminal histories, and
those tailored to sociocultural differences such as poverty and ethnicity.
Batterer typologies. Assuming there can be a consensus on groups of individual
attributes (typologies), questions remain about how to treat them and whether
programs can be modified to meet the needs of every group. Feminist-based
programs view the focus on psychological attributes unfavorably, and researchers
do not agree on what a typology of batterers might look like.
Although psychological typologies are interesting from a theoretical standpoint,
they do not yet offer much assistance to the criminal justice system because of
the indepth assessment needed to identify characteristics and the lack of
typology-based interventions available. No consensus on psychological categories
for batterers has emerged from the research community. Criminal justice-based
typologies offer a more practical frontline approach.
The criminal justice system routinely categorizes offenders, making decisions
about the danger they pose and the appropriateness of interventions. However,
systematic assessment tools based on an articulated theory of batterer typology
have not been available. Recent research may offer a practical, standardized
approach that can aid criminal justice agencies in classifying offenders. Using
demographic information, criminal histories, and substance abuse data, this
research proposes several classification strategies[26] focused on predicting
batterers' retention in treatment and the likelihood they will reoffend with the
same or another victim.
Categorizing batterers on these two dimensions (risk of dropout and rearrest),
researcher John Goldkamp was able to draw some potentially
useful distinctions among offenders. For example, he found that more than one-third of the batterers he studied
fell into the lowest dropout risk and lowest same-victim rearrest categories. In
other words, they should be good treatment prospects and pose little risk to
their battering victims. He also found, however, that some offenders who pose
little threat to the victim are not likely to stay in treatment.[27] This type
of analysis could be helpful to probation officers, prosecutors, and judges in
sentencing and assigning batterers to programs (after which there would be
additional intake assessment).
Tailoring interventions to cultural differences. The batterer's socioeconomic
status, racial or ethnic identity, country of origin, and sexual orientation can
affect his expression of domestic violence and his response to treatment. (For
example, although domestic violence may be found in all social milieus, there is
evidence it is more prevalent among less affluent families.[28]) For this
reason, some interventions adapt to accommodate these factors. All programs may
be able to improve program retention and decrease resistance to treatment by
adopting culturally sensitive approaches that accommodate race, ethnicity,
gender, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status.
Culturally competent interventions. Cultural competence in an organization
refers to activities the organization undertakes to prepare itself to work with
a culturally diverse client population and program efforts that demonstrate
preparedness and willingness to work with this population.[29] Culturally
competent interventions are those that draw on the strength of the culture,
whether it is spirituality, a value placed on family, or communal social
systems. Such interventions also address such problems as substance abuse and
gender roles condoning wife abuse.
Batterer interventions need to become culturally competent if they are to retain
minority referrals and improve minority participation. They can do so by
building on the positive values and strengths of minority cultures and by
tapping the solidarity felt by members of the same minority culture that can
promote mutual support in the group. In sum, culturally competent interventions
can be used to diversify and refine interventions.
Programs for men of African descent. Some see racially mixed batterer
intervention groups as preferable because they believe battering has nothing to
do with socioeconomic or race issues. Others reject these groups as allowing men
to use cultural differences to avoid identifying with others in the group, thus
escaping responsibility for battering. By contrast, African-American groups can
enhance participation by enabling men to focus on what they did instead of on
social injustice or racism.
If groups consist exclusively of African-Americans, the members are also able to
avoid assuming roles that some whites in the group might ascribe to them. With a
culturally focused curriculum, African-Americans are able to construct their own
reality rather than accept the constructs and limitations society places on
them.
Issues for recent Asian immigrants.
Because of cultural barriers against speaking openly in a group, specialized
groups for Asian batterers, who may be recent immigrants, may include initial
individual counseling. One-on-one encounters may help avoid humiliating men
whose culture places a high value on peer acceptance. The counselors in the
programs visited for this report who work with Asian immigrants agreed that the
men could not participate effectively in the standard Duluth-style intervention
because many of them are averse to group work and abhor confrontation.
Certain cultural values can militate against treatment. According to counselors
interviewed for this study who are themselves Asians, domestic abuse is regarded
throughout Southeast Asia as a private matter and as socially acceptable; for
this reason, some Asian batterers have great difficulty accepting that these
behaviors are illegal in the United States. Notions of gender equality are
difficult for both women and men to accept. To deal with these and other Asian
cultural characteristics, the Asian counselors interviewed for this report had
developed a nonconfrontational, Socratic method of counseling batterers that
relies heavily on metaphors, parables, and analogies.
Latinos who speak Spanish. Efforts to make a batterer intervention curriculum
relevant to Spanish-speaking Latinos can flounder on the question of which
specific Latino culture should be the focus. Because several cultural groups may
share certain characteristics--an identity as immigrants, economic instability,
and low literacy in their native language-batterer treatment can encompass all
of them. In other cases, it is not feasible to create a group based on shared
experiences. For example, it may not always be possible that the group leader be
the same nationality as that of the participants. The short supply of culturally
compatible facilitators is a serious issue for Latino batterer interventions.
Age is also an issue. Among Latino batterers there is a cultural gap between
young and older men. Counselors see the young men as less family oriented, more
dependent on male friends who portray positive ties with women as a weakness,
and more violent.
Strategies used with Latino groups include discussing the batterer's distortion
of the concept of "machismo," challenging ownership of the partner,
countering excuses for battering based on cultural practices, and discussing and
learning to understand the clients' complex family ties.
Countering the specialized approach. The trend toward increased specialization
in intervention is now being challenged by a model based on "attachment
theory." As applied to batterers, the theory holds it is possible to
develop positive emotions such as trust, intimacy, and commitment and thus
overcome the anger, rooted in a sense of powerlessness or worthlessness, that
triggers the offending behavior. The Compassion Workshop, based in Silver
Spring, Maryland, which uses the model, employs cognitive restructuring to
short-circuit the anger before it develops and replace it with compassion. The
inclusion of several types of offenders-male and female heterosexual batterers,
gay and lesbian batterers, victims, and child abusers-in the same program is one
reason the Compassion Workshop is controversial.
The criminal justice response
Batterer intervention programs alone cannot be expected to deter domestic
violence; strong criminal justice support is also needed. The combined impact of
arrest, incarceration, adjudication, and probation supervision may send a
stronger message to the batterer about the seriousness of his behavior than what
is taught in an intervention program. Intervention programs rely on criminal
justice support to add force to their work. That support needs to be coordinated
systemwide. Coordination is important because victims can be endangered by any
breakdown in communication, failure of training, or lack of followthrough by
agency representatives.
Principal features of a coordinated, systemwide response. In addition to
coordination among agencies, the principal features of a supportive criminal
justice system include use of victim advocates throughout the system,
designation of special units or individuals, and provision of training. To be
effective, the response will extend to all components of the system, from law
enforcement through probation officers. (See "Key Components of an
Integrated Criminal Justice Response to Battering.")
Criminal justice issues affecting batterer intervention. A number of systemwide
issues have an indirect but serious impact on the efficacy of batterer
intervention. The experience of the programs studied for this report suggests
that by addressing these issues, the criminal justice system can support
intervention. The first issue is the time between sentencing and program
enrollment, which even in ideal circumstances averages 6 weeks but may take as
long as several months. Whatever the cause, if the criminal justice system
tolerates slow compliance and noncompliance, it creates an appearance of
unconcern for the crime and may also endanger the victim. Additional actions can
be taken at all points in the criminal justice system:
o Probation officers and program directors contacted for this report indicate
that tracking participants can be made more efficient. In many jurisdictions,
referral practices that give probationers a wide choice of programs may make it
difficult to track enrollment. A better approach might be to allow probation
officers to assign batterers to a specific intervention.
o Centralized dockets created to handle domestic violence cases present a number
of advantages for service delivery. Prosecutors can save time by not having to
travel from court to court; probation units located nearby can receive court
referrals quickly; judges can become expert in domestic violence issues; and
court-based victim advocates would have access to a facility in or near the
court to provide support and services for victims.
o Accurate, complete information about the defendant is key to successful
adjudication. If they are to make proper decisions concerning plea bargains,
sentencing, bail, and supervision, prosecutors, judges, and probation officers
need information about previous arrests, substance abuse history, involvement
with child protective services, and experience with batterer intervention.
o Opportunities for coordination by the criminal justice system include
integrating batterer intervention with court-ordered substance abuse treatment.
For cases in which the batterer has a substance abuse problem, courts can
mandate not only treatment but also batterer intervention, with probation
officers intensively monitoring compliance with treatment. Additionally, at the
court level, judges and probation officers can be alert to the danger posed by
domestic violence to children and coordinate with child protective services and
programs that specialize in domestically abusive families to ensure that
batterers' children are safe.
o Low-risk male heterosexuals may be the category of batterer most amenable to
standard intervention, but they are not the only category of batterers. Program
options are needed for the full range of batterers. Many program providers and
probation officers interviewed for this report voiced concern that only a
fraction of convicted batterers ever enter interventions. It would be useful if
probation officers could work with local intervention providers, when needed, to
develop sentencing options for different categories of batterers that include
treatment. As sentencing and program options for a fuller range of batterers are
developed, they are optimally followed by assessment tools to assign them to
appropriate interventions.
The key role of probation: supervision. Probation officers are the most critical
link between the criminal justice system and batterer interventions.30 Assigning
them to specialized units dedicated to domestic violence cases can help them do
a better job, although many who work in such units still feel their caseloads
are too heavy to provide the necessary services and supervision. If caseloads
were reduced, officers could work closely with victims, who may have special
needs. Probation officers may also have to face the problem of how to intervene
with clients who are refused service.
In one program visited for this study, the probation department emphasizes
coordination among other criminal justice agencies, batterer intervention
programs, substance abuse treatment programs, social services, victim advocates,
and the community.[31] Key department policies include preparation of thorough
presentencing reports urging judges to impose strict probation conditions,
maximum-intensity supervision, and rigorous monitoring of compliance. This
program also emphasizes substance abuse as a factor exacerbating recidivism.
Collaboration among community partners. The greatest contribution batterer
intervention programs make may not be with individual offenders but with their
ability to bring together major actors in the criminal justice and community
services sectors to work together to reduce domestic violence. This
collaboration can be informal, taking the form of monthly meetings of probation
officers, program providers, and victim advocates to discuss issues of mutual
concern. Less frequently, such meetings could be held with domestic violence
committees in neighboring jurisdictions to exchange information.
Criminal justice agencies can also work with the city- or county-level
committees that in a number of communities are charged with coordinating
domestic violence policy. Some of these committees make policy; others are a
forum for information exchange. In some States, they are empowered by State
standards to certify batterer interventions.
At the State level, criminal justice agencies can work with State committees and
task forces on domestic violence that address policy issues such as legal
reforms. These committees may also be charged with developing drafts of
standards for certification of batterer interventions.
Notes
1. These elements common to abusive behavior are reflected in the definitions of
domestic violence developed by two major practitioners. The definition developed
by Anne Ganley, one of the first mental health providers to establish a batterer
treatment program, is in her "Understanding Domestic Violence," in
Improving the Health Care Response to Domestic Violence: A Resource Manual for
Health Care Providers, produced by the Family Violence Prevention Fund and the
Pennsylvania Coalition Against Domestic Violence, n.d. The feminist perspective
is summarized in the model pioneered by Ellen Pence of Duluth, Minnesota
("The Power and Control Wheel"). See Pence, E., "Batterers'
Programs: Shifting from Community Collusion to Community Confrontation,"
unpublished monograph, Duluth, MN: Domestic Abuse Intervention Project, February
1988.
2. Statistics Packet: Third Edition, Philadelphia: National Clearinghouse for
the Defense of Battered Women, February 1994.
3. Crowell, Nancy, and Ann Burgess, eds., Understanding Violence Against Women,
Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1996: 32. In a recent study, Murray A.
Straus offers an explanation for the discrepancy between evidence that men and
women are approximately equal in their assault rates and evidence that men are
more likely to assault than are women. He proposes that the latter evidence
comes from studies that measure experiences more likely to result in physical
injury, which in turn are more likely to be inflicted by men. Such studies,
which Straus calls "crime studies," include the National Crime
Victimization Survey and the National Violence Against Women in America study.
They also reveal lower overall rates of assault than do the other, "family
conflict" studies. See Straus, Murray A., "The Controversy over
Domestic Violence by Women: A Methodological, Theoretical, and Sociology of
Science Analysis," in Violence in Intimate Relationships, ed. X.B. Arriaga
and S. Oskamp, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, in press.
4. Because the majority of interventions discussed here are designed for male
batterers, the term "batterer" will be matched with a male pronoun
unless female offenders specifically are being discussed.
5. Goldkamp, J.S., The Role of Drug and Alcohol Abuse in Domestic Violence and
Its Treatment: Dade County's Domestic Violence Court Experiment, Final Report,
Philadelphia: Crime and Justice Research Institute, June 1996; Busey, Tina,
"Treatment of Women Defendants," The Catalyst (Spring 1993): 3-4; and
Busey, Tina, "Women Defendants and Reactive Survival Syndrome," The
Catalyst (Winter 1993): 6-7.
6. Greenfeld, Lawrence A., et al., Violence by Intimates: Analysis of Data on
Crimes by Current or Former Spouses, Boyfriends, and Girlfriends, Bureau of
Justice Statistics Factbook, Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau
of Justice Statistics, March 1998: v, NCJ 167237.
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid: 13, 14. Crowell and Burgess (Understanding Violence Against Women) also
note the higher rates of intimate homicide of African-American women (page 27).
9. Greenfeld, Violence by Intimates: 13.
10. Ibid: 14.
11. See Butler, C., "Myths about Woman Abuse," in For Shelter and
Beyond, 2d. ed., Boston: Massachusetts Coalition of Battered Women's Groups,
n.d.: 21.
12. Belluck, Pam, "A Woman's Killer Is Likely to Be Her Partner, a New
Study in New York Finds," New York Times, March 31, 1997.
13. See Linn, M.W. L., and C.I. Tan, "Holding up More Than Half the
Heavens: Domestic Violence in Our Communities, A Call for Justice," in The
State of Asian America: Activism and Resistance in the 1990s, ed. K. Aguilar-San
Juan, Boston: South End Press, n.d.: 321.
14. For a recent analysis of evaluations of batterer treatment programs, see
Davis, Robert C., and Bruce G. Taylor, Does Batterer Treatment Reduce Violence?
A Synthesis of the Literature, unpublished paper, February 24, 1998. (The
research was conducted for Victim Services and sponsored by the National
Institute of Justice.) There is also a discussion in Violence in Families:
Assessing Prevention and Treatment Programs, ed. Rosemary Chalk and Patrick A.
King, Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1998: 178-180.
15. Interview with Edward Gondolf, October 22, 1996.
16. Pence, E., and M. Paymar, Education Groups for Men Who Batter: The Duluth
Model, New York: Springer, 1993.
17. Gondolf, E.W., and J. Hanneken, "The Gender Warrior: Reformed Batterers
on Abuse, Treatment, and Change," Journal of Family Violence 2(2)(1987):
177-191.
18. Dutton, D., "Patriarchy and Wife Assault: The Ecological Fallacy,"
Violence and Victims 9(2)(1994): 167-182.
19. Russell, M., "Wife Assault Theory, Research, and Treatment: A
Literature Review," Journal of Family Violence 3(3) (1988): 193-208.
20. Browne, K., D.G. Saunders, and K.M. Staecker, "Process-Psychodynamic
Groups for Men Who Batter: Description of a Brief Treatment Model,"
unpublished manuscript, University of Michigan, January 26, 1996.
21. Dutton, "Patriarchy and Wife Assault"; and Adams, D.,
"Treatment Models for Men Who Batter: A Profeminist Analysis," in
Feminist Perspectives on Wife Abuse, ed. K. Yllo and M. Bograd, Newbury Park,
CA: Sage Publications, 1988.
22. See Browne, Saunders, and Staecker, "Process-Psychodynamic Groups for
Men Who Batter," and Gondolf, E.W., "Multi-Site Evaluation of Batterer
Intervention Systems: A Summary of Preliminary Findings," manuscript,
Mid-Atlantic Training Institute, October 24, 1996.
23. Eisikovits, Z.C., and J.L. Edelson, "Intervening with Men Who Batter: A
Critical Review of the Literature," Social Service Review 37(1989):
384-414; and Feazell, C.S., R.S. Mayers, and J. Deschner, "Service for Men
Who Batter: Implications for Programs and Policies," Family Relations
33(1984): 217-223.
24. Gondolf, E.W., Men Who Batter: An Integrated Approach to Stopping Wife
Abuse, Holmes Beach, FL: Learning Publications, Inc., 1985. The group is the
modality of choice because it combats implicit approval of abuse perceived to be
held by people outside the group, because successful group members can serve as
role models, and because the group functions as a source of support for the
offender.
25. Paymar, M., Violent No More: Helping Men End Domestic Abuse, Alameda, CA:
Hunter House, Inc., 1993; and Pence, E., "Batterers' Programs: Shifting
from Community Collusion to Community Confrontation."
26. Goldkamp, The Role of Drug and Alcohol Abuse.
27. Ibid.: 202. Gondolf developed a computerized method for scoring risk of
dropout and arrest.
28. Straus, M., R. Gelles, and S. Steinmetz, Behind Closed Doors: Violence in
the American Family, New York: Doubleday, 1980.
29. Williams, O., and L. Becker, "Domestic Partner Abuse Treatment Programs
and Cultural Competence: The Results of a National Survey," Violence and
Victims 9(3)(1994): 287-296.
30. Probation officers are involved in the majority of court-mandated batterer
treatment cases, but in many other cases this is not so.
31. Gelb, A., The Quincy Court Model Domestic Abuse Program Manual, Swampscott,
MA: Production Specialties, n.d.
-------------------------------
Sources of Information for the Study
Information was obtained from observations of batterer intervention programs and
a number of other sources, including interviews with key program directors and
staff and a review of the literature on the topic. All data on program
enrollment, completion, and success rates were provided by the staff of the
programs discussed in this report. The 13 programs in 5 States that were
selected for this study represent a range of approaches:
o EMERGE, in Quincy, Massachusetts; and AMEND, in Denver, two of the largest and
most established programs, are modified continually to keep up with the most
recent trends in batterer intervention.
o Domestic Abuse Intervention Services of Des Moines is based on the
"Duluth model."
o Family Services of Seattle, also based on the Duluth model, serves low-income
clients.
o Harborview Medical Center, in Seattle, is based on a public health model of
intervention.
o House of Ruth, in Baltimore, is based on the Duluth model and serves
interracial clients.
o The Third Path, in Arapahoe County, Colorado, treats high-risk offenders based
on a batterer typology and using psychological approaches.
o The Compassion Workshop, in Silver Spring, Maryland, uses cognitive
restructuring techniques to address "attachment abuse."
In addition to these eight, five smaller programs serving specialized
populations were studied in Seattle. They are discussed in the section,
"Current trends and innovations."
Other sources of information were as follows:
o Telephone interviews with directors of 22 batterer intervention programs
located throughout the country.
o Interviews with more than 60 criminal justice professionals, batterer program
directors and service providers, battered women's advocates, and domestic
violence policymakers at the sites of the 13 programs.
o Interviews with experts in the field of batterer intervention from
institutions of higher education throughout the country.
o Review of the literature and of State and local criminal justice protocols on
batterer intervention.
Information was also obtained from observing training programs and from
presentations on domestic violence policy for service providers and criminal
justice professionals.
-------------------------------
State Standards for Service Providers
As of 1996, more than half the States and the District of Columbia had adopted
standards or guidelines governing programs or individuals providing batterer
intervention, and 13 others were developing them.
What the standards govern. Most standards are designed to institutionalize the
current norms of mainstream batterer interventions. They may specify the agency
that certifies programs; prescribe the interval for certification renewal;
indicate what the court contact or referral, the length of treatment, the
screening criteria, and the fee should be; and stipulate elements of program
content, such as the curriculum and structure.
Accommodating innovation. Local networks of intervention programs and criminal
justice agencies that are developing standards may want to avoid standards that
stifle innovation. Not enough is known about the efficacy of current
interventions to avoid creating new standards that may not accommodate
innovation. Ideally, standards should be crafted to foster innovation while
providing safeguards for victims. State and local boards governing batterer
intervention providers could provide oversight and evaluation of newly proposed
interventions and integrate the findings into their practice models. Better
evaluations of existing programs would allow standards to focus on
performance-based outcomes.
State standards may be controversial because of concern that they result in a
"cookie cutter" approach to intervention (when research points to the
need for diverse approaches). On the other hand, some advocates argue that
having no standards might be more dangerous than having overly restrictive ones.
-------------------------------
Key Components of an Integrated
Criminal Justice Response to Battering[a]
A coordinated, systemwide response to battering, extending from arrest through
probation or parole, can reinforce the message of batterer programs and motivate
batterers to comply with treatment. The principal features are as follows:
o Law enforcement. Officers can be trained to increase their sensitivity to the
needs of victims and thoroughly investigate allegations of violence. They can
increase their effectiveness if they enforce bench warrants issued for batterers
who have violated the terms of their probation.[b]
o Pretrial screening. Offenders can be screened before trial to ensure they are
not released on their own recognizance or on bail before arraignment. Pretrial
services staff can gather as much background information as possible for the
prosecutor and judge.
o Prosecutors. Some prosecutors can specialize in domestic violence cases.
Domestic violence prosecutors need to receive adequate support from police,
probation officers, and victim advocates to follow through on cases. Other steps
prosecutors can take include pursuing cases without victim testimony, if
necessary; using "vertical prosecution"; keeping files containing such
information as previous arrests and convictions; using victim advocates to aid
in case preparation; pursuing probation revocation; and requesting offender
participation in batterer intervention programs as a condition of probation or
other sentence.
o Victim advocates. Victim advocates could be made available at all stages of
the criminal justice process. Based in the specialized criminal justice units,
they would contact the victim as soon as possible, explain the criminal justice
system, gather evidence, assist with safety planning, and notify the victim of
key events in the case. They could also make their case history records
available to prosecutors.
o Judges. Judges could be assigned to specialized domestic violence dockets and
issue sentences that include jail time, mandatory participation in batterer
intervention programs, or other sanctions. Judges could be most effective if
they respond forcefully to batterers who do not abide by the terms of their
sentences; make referrals to appropriate programs; are familiar with State
standards for batterer programs; and keep alert to possible co-occurrence of
battering and child abuse. Courts could process domestic violence cases quickly
and require prompt enrollment in programs when this is part of the sentence.
o Probation officers. If organized in specialized units with reduced caseloads,
probation officers could provide intensive probation supervision. To supervise
batterers as effectively as possible, probation officers could increase their
understanding of domestic violence issues, batterer interventions, and emerging
batterer typologies. Thoroughly prepared presentencing reports are a necessity,
as is quickly obtaining information about batterers sentenced to probation,
monitoring sobriety through urine screens, and developing assessment tools or
referral policies to assist in assigning batterers to programs. Probation
officers could also take the lead in establishing meetings with batterer
intervention service providers.
Notes
a. For a more detailed description of an integrated criminal justice response to
domestic violence, see Gelb, A., The Quincy Court Model Domestic Abuse Program
Manual, Swampscott, MA: Production Specialists, n.d.
b. Because enforcement commonly has little or no direct contact with batterer
intervention programs, this report does not include an indepth discussion of the
police response to domestic violence.
-------------------------------
Kerry Murphy Healey, Ph.D., is a consultant with Abt Associates Inc., and
Christine Smith is a Senior Analyst with Abt. The study was conducted under NIJ
contract OJP-94-C-007. The full report on which this summary was based, Batterer
Intervention: Program Approaches and Criminal Justice Strategies (Issues and
Practices, National Institute of Justice, February 1998, NCJ 168638), is
available from the National Criminal Justice Reference Service, 800-851-3420,
and can be downloaded from the NIJ Web site at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij. The full
report contains a chapter on additional sources of information about batterer
interventions.
-------------------------------
The National Institute of Justice is a component of the Office of Justice
Programs, which also includes the Bureau of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of
Justice Statistics, the Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,
and the Office for Victims of Crime.
-------------------------------
NCJ 171683
|
|
Violent Men
