Outcome of Mandated Treatment for Generally Violent and Family Only Violent Perpetrators of Intimate Partner Violence

Criminal Justice and Behavior

Brenner

et al. 2015

Self Cite

The present study investigated the predictive utility of violence severity ratings on recidivism based on behavior-based subtypes (family only [FO] violent and generally violent [GV]) of intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetrators. Participants consisted of 328 men between the ages of 17 to 72 sentenced to probation in Lake County, Illinois between 2006 and 2008. The relationship between ratings of violence severity for the arresting event, based on victims' and perpetrators' accounts to responding police officers, and domestic violence recidivism for a 3-year postprobation completion/termination period was examined. Utilizing victims' accounts, the Kaplan-Meier log rank test revealed a significant main effect for violence severity. In addition, perpetrator type moderated the relationship between violence severity and postprobation recidivism, such that a positive association was found for GV men but not for FO violent men. Results corroborate the predictive utility of assessing violence severity at the arresting event, particularly within GV men of IPV.

Section: Analyses Examining Whether Type Of Perpetrator Moderates Relsupporting

confidence: 86%

Perpetrator Type Moderates the Relationship Between Severity of Intimate Partner Violence and Recidivism

Goldstein

Criminal Justice and Behavior

Brenner

et al. 2015

Self Cite

“…Somebody presenting with only psychological aggression requires a different intervention and response from the criminal justice system than somebody who is an intimate terrorist and has consistently and repeatedly terrorized his or her partner both psychologically and physically. There is some evidence from both existing criminal justice and psychological studies to support such differential intervention (Buzawa, Hotaling, Klein, & Byrne, 1999;Cantos, Brenner, Goldstein, Lee, & Fowler, 2012;Puffett & Gavin, 2004).…”

Section: Severity Of the Behaviormentioning

confidence: 92%

One Size Does Not Fit All in Treatment of Intimate Partner Violence

O’Leary

2014

Partner Abuse

Self Cite

A critical examination is needed of the often mandated one-size-fits-all Duluth intervention for male perpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV). The underlying philosophy of Duluth-based interventions is evaluated as well as the treatment outcome literature for this intervention. There is very little evidence to justify the current legal system practice of mandating all perpetrators to psychological interventions addressing power and control issues. A literature review of scientific findings with IPV perpetrators and the issues that need to be taken into consideration in developing alternative evidencebased interventions are presented. The evidence seems to favor heterogeneity and not homogeneity with respect to both type of perpetrator and type of violence. Assessment and treatment suggestions are made to address this evidence-based heterogeneity and a call is made to those responsible to stop perpetuating the practice of mandating all perpetrators to attend a single intervention for which there is very limited evidence of effectiveness. About twothirds of male perpetrators of IPV cease being physically aggressive against their partners if they are assigned to a probation officer, but there is minimal evidence that the addition of a Duluth-based intervention makes perpetration less likely.

“…These findings attest to the predictive validity of the categorization system and are consistent with findings for other methods of categorizing GV versus FO perpetrators (Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart, 1994; Stoops et al, 2010). Cantos et al (2015) found that FO offenders were also more likely to complete treatment than GV offenders, and Cantos, Brenner, Goldstein, Lee, and Fowler (2012) reported that GV offenders were more likely than FO offenders to reoffend in a 3-year period following termination of probation. Recently, Goldstein, Cantos, Brenner, Verborg, and Kosson (2016) reported a positive association between severity of violence and recidivism for GV offenders but not for FO violent offenders.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Impact of Perpetrator Characteristics on the Completion of a Partner Abuse Intervention Program

Mach

Weber

et al. 2017

J Interpers Violence

Self Cite

This study examined how type of perpetrator (family only [FO] vs. generally violent [GV]), readiness to change, and stake in conformity function separately and together in predicting completion of a partner abuse intervention program (PAIP). Data were collected from 192 male perpetrators of intimate partner violence (IPV) who were court mandated to attend a PAIP. Participants were categorized as FO violent or GV based on a combination of their self-report and official records of violence. Stake in conformity has been defined as the degree to which an individual is invested in the values and institutions of a society. A composite stake in conformity score was computed for each participant based on his education level, and marital and employment status. Each participant was also assigned a stage of change score based on his responses on a validated measure of stage of change for domestic violence perpetrators. Analyses indicated that stage of change was not related to program completion or attendance. Type of perpetrator and stake in conformity composite score were significantly related to program completion. Perpetrators with higher stake in conformity scores and individuals categorized as FO attended more PAIP sessions and were more likely to complete the program. When both predictors were examined together, only stake in conformity composite score uniquely predicted program attendance and completion. These findings provide additional evidence that subtype of IPV perpetrator has implications for treatment responsiveness and provide preliminary evidence for the value of improved measurement of investment in societal institutions.