Cet article présente les résultats d’une étude qualitative menée auprès de vingt-deux pères participant à une thérapie de groupe pour violence conjugale. Cette étude avait pour but de comprendre les expériences paternelles de ces hommes et les éléments qui influencent leur paternité. Dans le cadre des entrevues individuelles semi-dirigées, les pères ont été très éloquents quant aux effets de leur violence sur leur paternité, mais ils ont aussi parlé des divers changements qu’ils ont réalisés, sur le plan de leurs comportements et attitudes depuis qu’ils ont entamé leur démarche d’aide. Les résultats de l’étude révèlent qu’il y a des raisons d’être concerné par rapport aux pratiques paternelles de ces hommes. Les résultats font également apparaître l’importance d’adopter une analyse dynamique et évolutive de la paternité des hommes reconnaissant ainsi qu’ils sont en processus de changement.
There are ongoing debates in the scientific community and in practice settings about how intimate partner violence (IPV) should be defined and understood and about how various interventions must be carried out. If these debates are to bear fruit, however, we must first gain a comprehensive understanding of each stakeholder's viewpoints on IPV and its solutions. This article seeks to contribute to this goal by summarizing empirical studies investigating how practitioners who work with IPV perpetrators understand the problem and its solutions. Based on an integrative review of the literature, it focuses on how practitioners define IPV and its causes, how they perceive the perpetrators and victims, and on the solutions they put forward in order to work against this social problem. The limitations of our current knowledge are outlined as well as the implications of this review for IPV debates.
To document the viewpoints on intimate partner violence (IPV) of Québec practitioners working with violent partners and of program managers of batterer intervention programs (BIPs). Method: Based on Loseke's ( 2003) theory of the construction of social problems, a qualitative study was carried out with 25 practitioners working with violent partners and with18 program managers of BIPs so as to explore their conceptions of IPV and their representations of perpetrators and victims. Results: Study participants primarily defined IPV as a way of taking control, while nonetheless noting other motivations. They also insisted on the diversity of contexts of IPV and its numerous manifestations. For them, IPV was a complex, multifactorial problem, involving individual risk factors for the most part, though also including contextual and social ones. Not only did they not see a single type of IPV, but they also saw no single perpetrator or victim profile. They saw both perpetrators and victims as accountable for their choices, even though they posed some limitations on this general principle of accountability. Conclusions: Complexity and diversity seemed to characterize their conceptions of IPV and their representations of perpetrators and victims. Findings are discussed in the light of current debates about IPV, of implications for BIPs, and of contexts that may influence IPV conceptions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.