Search

In the United States, the judicial system response to violence between intimate partners, or intimate partner violence (IPV), typically mandates that adjudicated perpetrators complete a batterer intervention program (BIP). The social science data has found that these programs, on the whole, are only minimally effective in reducing rates of IPV. The authors examined the social science literature on the characteristics and efficacy of BIPs. More than 400 studies were considered, including a sweeping, recently conducted survey of BIP directors across the United States and Canada. Results of this review indicate that the limitations of BIPs are due, in large part, to the limitations of current state standards regulating these programs and, furthermore, that these standards are not grounded in the body of empirical research evidence or best practices. The authors, all of whom have considerable expertise in the area of domestic violence perpetrator treatment, conducted an exhaustive investigation of the following key intervention areas: overall effectiveness of BIPs; length of treatment/length of group sessions; number of group participants and number of facilitators; group format and curriculum; assessment protocol and instruments; victim contact; modality of treatment; differential treatment; working with female perpetrators; working with perpetrators in racial and ethnic minority groups; working with lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) perpetrators; perpetrator treatment and practitioner–client relationships; and required practitioner education and training. Recommendations for evidence-based national BIP standards were made based on findings from this review.

A 15-page questionnaire, the North American Domestic Violence Intervention Program Survey, was sent to directors of 3,246 domestic violence perpetrator programs (also known as batterer intervention programs, or BIPs) in the United States and Canada. Respondent contact information was obtained from state Coalitions Against Domestic Violence and from various government agencies (e.g., Attorney General) available on the Internet. Two hundred thirty-eight programs completed and returned the questionnaire, a response rate of 20%. The survey yielded descriptive data on respondent characteristics; program philosophy, structure, content, and service; client characteristics; treatment approach and adjunct services; and group facilitator views on intervention approaches and domestic violence policy and treatment standards. The programs varied in the extent to which they adhere to treatment approaches suggested by the empirical research literature. In addition, chi-square analyses were conducted on the associations between several factors. Significant correlations were found between respondent low level of education and adherence to a feminist-gendered program philosophy; respondent low level of education and use of a shorter assessment protocol; feminist-gendered program philosophy and incorrect facilitator knowledge about domestic violence; and feminist-gendered program philosophy and a program focus on power and control as the primary cause of domestic violence.

Objective: The purpose of the present study was to investigate the impact of gender and other variables commonly associated with intimate partner abuse perpetration on program completion and pretreatment abusiveness profiles among a sample of men and women ordered into a 52-week batterer intervention program (BIP). Method: The study employed a posttest only design with nonequivalent groups (comparing program completers to dropouts and men to women) in an analysis of 175 clients mandated into a BIP. Results: Analysis indicated that there were no significant differences between men and women in terms of program completion and that women were significantly more likely than men to report engaging in severe physical abuse perpetration, and a logistic regression analysis indicated that dropouts were 6 times more likely to have initiated physical abuse compared to completers. Conclusion: These findings reveal characteristics of BIP program participants as they relate to self-reported abusiveness and provide preliminary evidence suggesting that both BIP pretreatment profiles and treatment completion rates of men and women are similar, with implications for policy and treatment.

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to improve the understanding of how collaboration agreements function and their benefits for the environments where they are implemented. The goal of these initiatives is to bring together in partnerships the actors concerned by domestic violence and coordinate their actions to ensure the safety of persons at risk of intrafamilial homicides through an effective collaboration structure. Design/methodology/approach: The synthesis data originates from four research projects research work with the partners of four studied agreements: A-GIR (Arrimage-Groupe d'Intervention Rapide [Rapid Intervention Unit]) in Laval, Alerte-Lanaudière [Lanaudière Alert] in the Lanaudière region, P.H.A.R.E. (Prévention des homicides intrafamiliaux par des Actions Rapides et Engagées [Domestic Homicide Prevention through Rapid and Committed Action]) in South Western Montérégie and the Rabaska Protocol in Abitibi-Témiscamingue. Findings: Overall, the interveners agree on the positive impacts resulting from the relationships between the partners, the development of a common expertise and the collective responsibility acting to prevent intrafamilial homicides, while highlighting the challenges met and the essential conditions for the success of these collaboration initiatives. Research limitations/implications: Findings are drawn from participants in a particular locale – i.e. French–Canada, and may not entirely apply to other regions and cultures. Additional research should be conducted with similar methodology in other regions of Canada and elsewhere. Practical implications: The findings should help in the further development of best practices for IPH prevention and therefore protect potential victims from lethal assaults of domestic violence. Originality/value: Few studies have been conducted on how stakeholders involved in IPH prevention actually work together in collaborative efforts, and none, as far as we know, specifically on drawing up formal agreements. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Based on the emerging literature being developed in Motivational Interviewing that suggests certain group process factors and facilitator attributes predict treatment outcomes, this study sought to investigate the relationship between both client and facilitator ratings of the batterer intervention group experience. This study presents data from 16 group facilitators drawn from five agencies and 175 clients being served by these facilitators. The data gathered included both facilitator ratings of clients (i.e., Group Engagement Measure-GEM) and client ratings of facilitators and the group experience (i.e., Client Rating of Facilitator-CRF, Client Perceived Benefits of Group-CPBG). Results indicate that facilitators rated clients as being engaged in the group process across all the domains assessed by the GEM and that clients viewed the facilitators and group experiences favorably as assessed by the CRF and CPBG. There was no significant correlation between the GEM and CRF or the GEM and CPBG, but there was a strong, positive correlation between the CRF and CPBG. The results here support previous research findings suggesting a strong correlation between client engagement in the therapeutic process, based on their perception of the facilitator, and their perceived benefits of the group experience. Implications of the findings for improving empirical investigations of the batterer intervention group experience were explored and discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In an article previously published in this journal (Hamel, 2007) the author contradicted the patriarchal paradigm which has guided domestic violence research, intervention and policy for the past three decades. [...]

This study examined perceptions of motives in the perpetration of intimate partner violence. Respondents (N = 401) of diverse professions read three vignettes and indicated their perception of the aggressor's motive (from 1 = Exclusively Expressive; 5 = Exclusively Coercive). Half of respondents read vignettes describing male-perpetrated violence against a female partner; the other half, female-perpetrated violence against a male partner. Overall, male-perpetrated aggression was seen as more coercive than female-perpetrated aggression, particularly by shelter workers and victim advocates. Further analyses revealed that men generally gave higher ratings than women, and that women rated female-perpetrated aggression as less coercive than male-perpetrated aggression. In contrast, men did not differ in their ratings of male versus female perpetration. Implications are discussed with respect to the assessment and treatment of partner violence. Keywords: coercive violence; control; expressive violence; intimate partner violence; motives; patriarchal paradigm; research bias; self-defense

Some three decades after the first shelters for battered women were established in England and the United States, public discourse and public policy on intimate partner violence (IPV) has framed [...]

Metal faraday cage structure is a means to suppress crosstalk between circuit components in a telecommunication IC. Ultralow substrate crosstalk is demonstrated using a novel metal Faraday cage isolation scheme in silicon-on-insulator technology.

An electrical technique to measure the bandgap difference of the neutral base of SiGe heterojunction bipolar transistors is presented.