An Evaluation of Men’s Batterer Treatment Groups

Abstract

Objective: Fifteen treatment groups for men who abused intimate partners were evaluated. Method: 104 men took part, with a completion rate of 68.3%. Scores on social desirability were utilized to adjust totals on other self-report scales. Results: Group completers (n = 71) were no different from dropouts (n = 33) on the adjusted standardized measures or demographics. Group completion was associated with significant improvements on the adjusted variables of appraisal social support, self-esteem, perceived stress, attitudes toward marriage and the family, locus of control, and the marital relationship functions of roles, affective expression, and communication. Importantly, adjusted scores on both the Physical and Non-Physical Abuse subscales of the Index of Spouse Abuse were significantly reduced, the latter to below the clinical cutoff. No differences were found between court-mandated and non-court-mandated group completers. Conclusions: The utility of using social desirability to adjust scores is highlighted. The implications for group treatment are discussed.

Domestic violence treatment response and recidivism: A review and implications for the study of family violence

“…For instance, Dutton et al (1997b) found that voluntary treatment participants had a signifi cantly longer time until fi rst assault. However, beyond a higher level of perceived stress for court-mandated offenders at post-treatment, Tutty et al (2001) found no differences between court-mandated and voluntary treatment participants.…”

“…Despite lingering disagreement about the effectiveness of domestic violence treatment, it appears that domestic violence treatment results in some positive changes in batterers who complete it (Babcock et al, 2004, Davis and Taylor, 1999, Dutton et al, 1997a, Hamberger and Hastings, 1988and Tutty et al, 2001. Moreover, batterers who complete domestic violence treatment are less likely to subsequently recidivate and have fewer re-assaults when they do recidivate than those who drop out of treatment (Chen et al, 1989and Dutton et al, 1997bHamberger and Hastings;.…”

“…In addition, there are a variety of ways to measure domestic violence (e.g., self-report, criminal records, partner reports). Each of these methodologies for measuring domestic violence has limitations, and this further contributes to the challenges in the assessment of domestic violence (e.g., Rosenfeld, 1992 andTutty et al, 2001). Despite challenges in the assessment of domestic violence, research progress has been made and advances continue to be made.…”

“…Researchers occasionally consider arrests for any violent behavior or any other criminal activity as evidence of recidivism. Other studies utilize partner report (and/or self-report) of physical violence to determine if recidivism has occurred; relying on self-report of the perpetrator has been thought to greatly underestimate reporting of violence and other characteristics, although some have tried to improve the utilization of batterer self-report by adjusting scores for social desirability (Tutty et al, 2001). Rosenfeld (1992) noted that recidivism rates across treatment studies were markedly different depending on the methodology (7% based on criminal records, 36% based on partner report).…”

“…Comparing treatment completers to treatment dropouts, Tutty et al (2001) evaluated the outcome of treatment for domestic violence perpetration; there were no signifi cant differences found between the two groups (completers and drop-outs) on pre-treatment measures. With approximately 68% of the participants completing treatment, treatment completion was found to be signifi cantly associated with reduced self-reported frequency and severity of abuse (physical and non-physical), higher social support, increased internal locus of control, decreased perceived stress, and improved marital relations.…”