The Future of Batterer Programs: Reassessing Evidence-Based Practice

Preface

xi Preface A Disconcerting Appeal to Evidence-Based Practice A woman who had been battered by her former husband recently contacted me about batterer programs. The court case against her former husband had been dismissed after he had undergone six weeks of individual therapy with a social worker. The woman was concerned about what appeared to her to be a shortterm and insufficient treatment for her husband’s previous violence. She also was fearful because of her husband’s continued threats and harassment after he had completed treatment. For instance, when returning their child from a visit with him, the husband said, “I’m going to get you for all of this!” The woman’s husband had sought treatment from the social worker rather than participating in the established batterer program ordered by the judge. The batterer program was four to six months of weekly group sessions, following an orientation and intake meeting. Like most such programs, it included reports to the court, links to the local battered women’s program, and referrals to other services as needed. The woman gave me the social worker’s letter to the judge indicating the details of a different approach. The social worker’s treatment consisted of three meetings for individual assessment , the last of which included the man’s current woman friend. These meetings were followed by three individual therapy sessions addressing the man’s psychological issues. The letter to the judge pointed out that the social worker was employing an “evidence-based approach” substantiated by research. According to the letter, the research on conventional batterer programs suggested that the programs were not very effective, and the social worker as a licensed professional had the training to evaluate and treat the former husband effectively. The judge had taken the letter at face value and closed the case. xii | Preface Claims and Counterclaims This one case reflects what is going on through much of the country. There are claims that batterer programs are simply not effective and, furthermore, are ideologically rooted in an outmoded feminist paradigm—a perspective that sees men’s acting out of a sense of entitlement or control over women as an extension of sexism in society and gendered roles in relationships. As a result, many specialized programs for domestic violence offenders are being questioned , replaced, or supplemented by alternatives. In some jurisdictions, court referrals to the established programs have dropped substantially. In others, mental health or alcohol treatment programs are dealing with the offenders. At the same time, there are counterclaims that batterer programs are making an important contribution to the work against domestic violence and are headed in the right direction. From this point of view, many of the alternatives have diverted attention to the batterers’ psychological well-being and away from victim’s safety. This contention is fueled, at least in part, by the call for evidence-based practice— programs and treatment shown to be appropriate and effective in addressing the problem of concern. What has become a movement cuts across medical, psychological , and criminal justice fields and expects treatment and intervention of all sorts to be justified by research. Increasingly, referrals, funding, and certification are being tied to this sort of justification and documentation. The aim is not only to ensure that programs are efficient and effective. It is also to weed out programs that might be based on pet theories, an entrenched philosophy, isolated observations, anecdotal evidence, or a political agenda. There is no doubt that a lot has been learned from working with batterers over the years and from the spate of research that has examined batterers and batterer programs. At face value, experimental evaluations of batterer programs suggest that they may not be very effective, compared to simply putting offenders on probation. As critics of batterer programs also note, much of the recent research points to psychological deficits in male batterers and provocations from complicit partners that warrant a different approach. However, research in the broader criminal justice field, and other approaches to program evaluation, offer support for the established batterer programs and the direction they are heading. In sum, the future of batterer programs as we know them is unclear, thanks in part to the increasing calls for evidence-based practice. The options for programs and treatment are becoming more diverse—some might say the field is now in disarray. A more positive view might be that batterer programs are continuing to evolve along their original guidelines of safety for victims and...