Developing Guidelines for Domestic Violence Offender Programs: What Can We Learn From Related Fields and Current Research? (From Domestic Violence Offenders: Current Interventions, Research, and Implications for Policies and Standards, P 235-248, 2001, Robert A. Geffner and Alan Rosenbaum, eds. --

• NCJ Number: 197550
• Author(s): Daniel G. Saunders
• Date Published: 2001
• Length: 14 pages
• Sale Source: Haworth Maltreatment and Trauma Press
• Publication Format: Book (Softbound)
• Publication Type: Issue Overview
• Language: English
• Country: United States of America

Annotation

This article reviews the research literature on domestic violence, so as to help inform the development of guidelines for programs that treat men who abuse their intimate partners; and it profiles some successes and problems in other fields that might be instructive for the field of domestic violence.

Abstract

There is evidence for considerable variation among men who abuse their intimate partners; for example, the frequency and severity of domestic violence varies greatly. There is also increasing evidence of different types of men who batter along several dimensions, including childhood traumas, generalized versus family-only aggression, and personality type. The stage of motivation and level of moral development constitute other individual variables that have implications for individualized interventions. Some speculate that matching men to interventions based on motivational level or moral development is more important than the theoretical model used by the program; however, these theories have yet to be tested in offender programs. Some of the issues requiring additional research are whether an individual or group format is best, the duration of interventions, the place of trauma-based or insight approaches, and whether a conjoint (partners in treatment together) or gender-specific format is best. Overall, debates over best practices in the field of abuser treatment have yet to benefit very much from outcome evaluations and domestic violence research in general. Thus, firm conclusions about best practice methods are premature. Accounts of the development of practice methods in other fields, such as alcoholism treatment and mental health services, may provide the domestic-violence field with some valuable lessons about the consequences of inflexible paradigms. In the closely related field of offender rehabilitation, there is evidence for the benefits of matching offender types to types of interventions. Any guidelines instituted at the current level of research knowledge should allow for an openness to evidence that may challenge any currently used paradigm. Guidelines should account for differences in offender motivation levels, cultural backgrounds, risk of severe violence, and other factors that recognize individual characteristics of the batterer. 57 references