More Likely to Dropout, but What if They Don’t? Partner Violence Offenders With Alcohol Abuse Problems Completing Batterer Intervention Programs

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (9-10) ◽  
pp. 1958-1981 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marisol Lila ◽  
Enrique Gracia ◽  
Alba Catalá-Miñana

There is general consensus that alcohol abuse is a risk factor to be considered in batterer intervention programs. Intimate partner violence perpetrators with alcohol abuse problems are more likely to dropout of batterer intervention programs. However, there is little research on intimate partner violence perpetrators with alcohol abuse problems completing batterer intervention programs. In this study, we analyze drop-out rates among perpetrators with alcohol abuse problems and explore whether perpetrators with alcohol abuse problems completing a batterer intervention program differ from those who do not have alcohol abuse problems in a number of outcomes. The sample was 286 males convicted for intimate partner violence against women, attending a community-based batterer intervention program. Final (i.e., recidivism) and proximal (i.e., risk of recidivism, responsibility attributions, attitudes toward violence, sexism, psychological adjustment, and social integration) intervention outcomes were analyzed. Chi-square test, binary logistic regression, and one-way ANOVA were conducted. Results confirmed higher dropout rates among perpetrators with alcohol abuse problems. Results also showed a reduction in alcohol abuse among perpetrators with alcohol abuse problems completing the batterer intervention program. Finally, results showed that, regardless of alcohol abuse problems, perpetrators who completed the batterer intervention program showed improvements in all intervention outcomes analyzed. Perpetrators both with and without alcohol abuse problems can show positive changes after completing an intervention program and, in this regard, the present study highlights the need to design more effective adherence strategies for intimate partner violence perpetrators, especially for those with alcohol abuse problems.

Author(s):  
Adam M. Messinger

Intimate partner violence (IPV) prevention education, batterer intervention programs, and victim treatment services are often designed in part to help participants identify and undermine the causes of IPV so as to facilitate rehabilitation and limit future perpetration. Thus, understanding the causes of transgender IPV (T-IPV) is of vital importance to ending it. By drawing on both the T-IPV and the broader cisgender IPV research literatures, this chapter reviews emerging theories of the causes of T-IPV. These theorized causes include many that also have been identified in the cisgender IPV literature—including rationalizing abuse, socialization into IPV-condoning attitudes, and power imbalances—in addition to several causes unique to T-IPV, including transphobia-related perpetration theories and transphobia-related victimization vulnerability theories. Supporting evidence for and gaps in our knowledge about these causes also are reviewed.


Partner Abuse ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 359-374 ◽  
Author(s):  
JoAnna Elmquist ◽  
John Hamel ◽  
Ryan C. Shorey ◽  
Lindsay Labrecque ◽  
Andrew Ninnemann ◽  
...  

Research has attempted to elucidate men and women’s proximal motivations for perpetrating intimate partner violence (IPV). However, previous research has yet to clarify and resolve contention regarding whether motives for IPV are gender-neutral or gender-specific. Thus, the purpose of this study was to compare motives for physical IPV perpetration among a sample of men (n = 90) and women (n = 87) arrested for domestic violence and court referred to batterer intervention programs. Results demonstrated that the most frequently endorsed motives for IPV by both men and women were self-defense, expression of negative emotions, and communication difficulties. With the exception of expression of negative emotions and retaliation, with women endorsing these motives more often than men, there were no significant differences between men and women’s self-reported reasons for perpetrating physical aggression. The implications of these findings for future research and intervention programs are discussed.


Partner Abuse ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 3-37 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tatjana Raison ◽  
Donald Dutton

A review of 20 articles (with a collective N of 16,463) was conducted assessing reasons given by perpetrators for their commission of intimate partner violence (IPV). College, community, and batterer intervention program samples were used. Five studies used Follingstad's (1991) Motivation and Effects Questionnaire to assess reported motivations. This had an advantage in standardizing the definitions of motives, which varied widely in other studies. Perpetrators of IPV, whether male or female, do not describe their motives in gender-political terms. Instead, they describe them in psychological terms, such as anger, frustration, or gaining attention. The most frequently endorsed reasons were anger (68% by women, 47% by men) and gaining attention (53% by women, 55% by men). Self-defense was the least endorsed (7th of seven motives). The implications of this finding for the gender paradigm are discussed.


2016 ◽  
Vol 32 (5) ◽  
pp. 481-491 ◽  
Author(s):  
Penelope K. Morrison ◽  
Patricia A. Cluss ◽  
Elizabeth P. Miller ◽  
Rhonda Fleming ◽  
Lynn Hawker ◽  
...  

Partner Abuse ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (4) ◽  
pp. 483-506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Penelope K. Morrison ◽  
Patricia A. Cluss ◽  
Lynn Hawker ◽  
Elizabeth Miller ◽  
Donna George ◽  
...  

As part of a two-year ethnographic study of batterer intervention programs (BIPs) we interviewed 76 male perpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV) on their perspectives regarding BIP facilitators. Participants endorsed a number of characteristics of facilitators that helped to reduce their resistance to the group process and assisted in engaging them in the learning process, including facilitators who were invested in the program and its mission, and displayed a non-judgmental demeanor. At the same time, they also endorsed facilitators who were honest with them and challenged them on their behavior, and who exhibited a high degree of experience in IPV. Additionally, participants endorsed the need to have a female facilitator as part of the group to further promote engagement and learning. This study has implications for thinking about what components of BIP facilitation might be important for reducing some of the resistance that may lead to client attrition, and how BIPs can better engage clients in prosocial behavioral changes.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document