A Review of Domestic Violence Perpetrator Programmes in the United Kingdom
Deanne Mitchell
Monday, April 29, 2019
This article looks at the issue of programmes that work with perpetrators of domestic violence, considering approaches used and the limitations of research. This includes a study of feminist theory; and the general conclusion that more evidence-based studies are needed.
Report by Elizabeth Bates et al, Partner Abuse, 8 (2017)
The study, conducted by researchers at the University of Cumbria, reviewed current interventions or programmes for intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrators within the UK. The authors of this paper say that the evidence for the effectiveness of current provision is mixed, and can often depend on the ideological beliefs of the authors.
Approach and findings
A common feature of all the treatment programmes included in the review is that they all used a group setting to deliver treatment and interventions to perpetrators. The length of programmes varies widely, with an average across the providers of 29 sessions. In total, 42 per cent of providers ran sessions once a week, and 81 per cent of organisations served only male perpetrators in their provision. Three providers said the number of male to female perpetrators was around 50/50 but only a small number of organisations actually served women.
All organisations said that they provide perpetrators with skills around identifying and managing emotions, communication skills, general self-awareness, general coping and life skills. The majority also teach anger management, impulse control skills and conflict resolution skills; plus they discuss the impact of abuse on victims and the effects of violence on children and looked at identifying power and control tactics.
Cognitive behavioural therapy and motivational interviewing are both very common treatments or interventions. Others included social learning and strengths-based approaches. More than half the providers use some form of work around power and control, although only about 20 per cent described their work as feminist. There are a range of other techniques used, from solution-focused work to psycho-educational interventions and family therapy.
Evidence on accredited programmes
Evidence of these programmes is accredited by the Correctional Services Advice and Accreditation Panel (CSAAP) and through the charity Respect. There has been some disagreement around the UK standards. Some participants have endorsed them, commenting on the importance of Respect accreditation. However, others indicated the standards should be much more inclusive of a variety of perpetrator characteristics - for instance, around gender and sexuality.
There are few reviews about CSAAP-accredited programmes but the Integrated Domestic Abuse and Integrated Domestic Abuse programmes were studied by Bloomfield and Dixon, covering 6,695 offenders between 2002 and 2007. They found small but significant reductions in intimate partner violence (IPV) reoffending, including at a two-year follow up within the probation and prison service.
For the programmes accredited by Respect, the model by which organisations should align their work is feminist in nature. It focuses on a man's use of violence as an instrumental mechanism to exert control over his female partner.
There are few evaluations of these programmes but Project Mirabel has been conducted by researchers at Durham University.
Limitations
A major limitation of this paper is that there was a general unwillingness of many organisations to participate in the study. Only 21 organisations participated, which is a 10 per cent response rate. There is likely to be bias within the results. And few collected any data around recidivism or other programme outcomes. This fits with a lot of research within the field; that is, there is a call - for example from Dixon et al., 2012; Graham-Kevan, 2007; Dutton & Corvo, 2007 - for more evidence-based practice around the use of perpetrator programmes and for more published studies around the effectiveness of these.
Implications for practice
- The findings across the current sample and the review of current accreditation processes indicates the Duluth model and feminist approach to the Domestic Violence Perpetrator Programme is still strongly influential within the UK.
- The Duluth Model is based on the view that programmes should be focused on re-educating partner violent men. It is cited as still being very influential in UK-based work with IPV perpetrators.
- This study also suggests that interventions should be focusing on individuals and their characteristics, rather than seeing IPV as a problem that requires social change. Rather than educating men about power and control using a standardised approach, practice should be tailored to different circumstances.
- Finkel et al (2009) suggest an approach based on self-regulatory training and demonstrate the effectiveness of a similar self-regulation bolstering in one of their studies.
- It is suggested that, until there is a better link between research and practice, and research and policy, then this field will continue to be influenced by an ideological and possibly inappropriate model.
- It is suggested that there should be a move beyond gendered analysis and feminist models to explore existing programmes used for generally violent offenders; and towards attempts to adapt these to working with those who are domestically violent (Graham-Kevan, 2007).
Deanne Mitchell is information specialist, the Social Care Institute for Excellence (SCIE)