Perpetrator programmes for partner violence: Are they based on ideology or evidence?

Abstract

Purpose. The ideologically based view of intimate partner violence has traditionally influenced policy and practice in modern western nations and dominated cross-national research and practice. This review considers the validity of the position statement of a British organization responsible for accrediting many male perpetrator programmes in the statutory, voluntary, and private sector as an example of this ideological influence.Method. The position statement, informed by the patriarchal view of partner violence, is evaluated using empirical evidence from various branches of the social sciences, including psychology, that have not been guided by the patriarchal view.

Violencia en el noviazgo desde la perspectiva de varones adolescentes

“…Así, investigaciones internacionales apuntan la presencia de violencia durante el noviazgo no solo psicológica, sino también física, donde las agresiones son perpetradas por hombres y mujeres en tasas similares (Dixon, Archer, & Graham, 2012). En México, el Instituto Mexicano de la Juventud (2008) realizó una encuesta nacional descubriendo que el 15% de los adolescentes ha experimentado al menos un incidente de violencia física por parte de su pareja.…”

Investigating the true rate of physical intimate partner violence: A review of nationally representative surveys

“…Importantly, the definitions and methodology that guide this research are gender-inclusive, which allows hypotheses to be derived and tested concerning the possibility that both sexes can perpetrate this type of aggression. Resultant evidence has led researchers in various disciplines (e.g., family sociology, social work, criminology and clinical and forensic psychology) to view IPV as part of wider patterns in crime, human relations, aggression and personality (Dixon, Archer & Graham-Kevan, 2010). …”

Domestic Violence Intervention Programs for Perpetrators in Latin America and the Caribbean

“…This trend is also reflected in the scarce number of academics involved in conducting data collection/program assessment. Therefore, a proposed standard of practitioners liaising with academics is essential to link research to practice, particularly cutting-edge evidence-based research to identify and devise more effective interventions in terms of achieving lower recidivism and program dropout rates (Dixon, Archer, & Graham-Kevan, 2012;Graña et al, 2014;Hershenberg, Drabick, & Vivian, 2012).…”