Components of an Aboriginal-Based Family Violence Intervention Program

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to describe the essential elements of an Aboriginal-based family violence intervention program. Twenty-one Aboriginal family violence program administrators and service providers were asked "What program components are essential in an Aboriginal family violence prevention program?" Respondents identified the need for sound administrative structure and function, qualified and healthy staff, and consistent program funding. Coordinated service delivery with other community agencies was described. Program components should be based on traditional teachings, should create awareness of personal and family dynamics and change, and should educate about family violence. There were needs for components for partners seperately, partners and their children, partners together, and the whole family. These components coincided with Aboriginal traditional teachings. Implications for program development were described. W hen the Europeans first came to Canada, they and children to unhealthy environments. Imbalance in encountered some 55 First Nations (Dickason, Aboriginalcommunities has left families with many new dif-1992). These communities flourished for thou-ficulties, and one of these is violence. Familyviolenceamong sands of years prior to the arrival of Europeans but have Aboriginal people is a modern phenomenon. Its presence is been seriously challenged by the economic and social evidenceof how traditional wayshavebeen affectedby forces changes that followed. Activities such as the fur trade and outside of the community. settlement and other "harvesting" of natural resources wereRecent data on the nature and extent of the problem sugfollowed by legislation in the 19th and early 20th century gests that family violence affects Aboriginal families in designed to Westernize Canada's first people and systemat-Canada to a greater extent than non-Aboriginal families. The ically wipe out their cultures.GeneralSocialSurveyon Victimization utilizesa set ofbehav-At the time of contact, family violence was a rarity in ioral questions that define spousal violence as threatening to Canadian Aboriginal communities. Families bound by care, physically harm, intentionally acting aggressively, or forcing respect, and trust have experienced mounting stress as the unwanted sexual activity (Statistics Canada, 2001). values, principles, and traditions of communities have been Aboriginal people are almost three times more likely than challenged (McTinney, 1993). Treatiesand residentialschools non-Aboriginalpeople to report being assaultedby a spouse, havetaken awaythe rights of Nations,communities,andfam-and more often by an ex-spouse than by a current one ilies. Social problems that are not unique to Aboriginalpeo-(Statistics Canada, 2001). Aboriginal women are twice as pie, yet disproportionately affect them, have altered . likelyas Aboriginal men to report being a victim of spousal community and family life and continue to expose parents violence (Statistics Canada, 2001).

Effectiveness of a Domestic Abuse Program for Australian Indigenous Offenders

“…Cunneen (2001a) identified three themes as central to successful Indigenous rehabilitation and crime prevention programs: (a) enhancing self-determination, (b) holistic approaches, and (c) promoting empowerment rather than dependency. Others posit that successful Indigenous rehabilitative programs require local-level development in consultation with Indigenous communities (Cripps & Davis, 2013; facilitation by Indigenous staff and/or Elders (Brown & Languedoc, 2004); culturally specific content; an individual “healing” focus addressing spiritual and cultural loss (Boersig, 2007; McKendrick et al, 2017; Office of the Status of Women [OSW], 2001); engagement of the family, reconnection with homelands and traditional culture, and relevance to the life experiences of Indigenous people (Indigenous Justice Forum, Attorney-General’s Department, 2012; Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody, 1991; Trevethan et al, 2005; Willis & Moore, 2008). These contentions held by many Australian academics, Indigenous peoples, and their representatives (Brown & Languedoc, 2004; Cripps & Davis, 2012; OSW, 2001) are yet to be empirically tested.…”

“…Subsequent to these findings, the NSW Department of Justice requested development of a culture-specific DV rehabilitation program suitable for Indigenous men. The applicability of the DAP to the needs of Indigenous men was questioned, as the program was neither facilitated by local Indigenous Elders, nor included any culture-specific content as recommended by Cripps and Davis (2012 & 2013) and Brown and Languedoc (2004).…”

Investigating social policy relationships : a critical analysis of understandings of First Nation family violence

“…In studying these issues, case studies and/or interviews are often the methods of choice. Brown and Languedoc (2004) investigated essential program components of an Aboriginal family violence program in Canada. The authors conclude that program components should be based on traditional teachings, should create awareness of personal and family dynamics and change, and should educate about family violence.…”

Exploring Attrition and Completion in a Community Situated Family Violence Intervention Programme

“…These responses are based on Western models of intervention that separate the needs of victims and perpetrators (Cripps & McGlade, 2008). Furthermore, research has found that family violence programmes working with indigenous groups need to see a person, their family, and their community as interconnected (Brown & Languedoc, 2004). Many Western approaches to family violence fail to do this.…”

“…Many Western approaches to family violence fail to do this. Western systems take either an individual approach, seeing the violence as caused by the perpetrators psychopathology; a familial approach, seeing the family system as being out of balance; or a social system approach, linking violence to males having greater power than females (Brown & Languedoc, 2004). Each of these approaches fails to take into account the complex interconnections between individuals, families, and their communities.…”