Domestic Violence Court Intervention Project

This research study examines the effectiveness of two domestic violence interventions to increase shelter use among women in a court advocacy program in upstate New York. The study found a significant advantage to offering a brief counseling component during an intervention, as opposed to only handing out an agency brochure and verbalizing shelter services to participants. Through qualitative inquiry rooted in Grounded Theory, the study accesses the impact of the criminal justice setting, direct observation, and the unstructured interview in acquiring pertinent screening information from victims. The study also uses Prochaska and DiClemente=s (1982) AStages of Change@ to better gage the readiness of each victim to make substantial and lasting changes in their relationship with the abuser. The study uncovered three potential areas for future research such as expanding service options for those victims who are not ready or willing to extricate themselves from the abuser. Second, preventing domestic violence earlier by directing preventative programs at children. Third, expanding what domestic violence workers look for during the screening process to measure the feasibility of including both family systems in the treatment plan especially if children are involved. Domestic Violence Court 5 Domestic Violence Court Intervention Project Literature Review Much of the current research on domestic violence focuses on the problem of male perpetrated violence against women. Researchers continue to explore the answers to significant questions such as, How do we identify victims of domestic violence more accurately? When are women more amenable to intervention? Also, what type of interventions are more effective in safely extricating women from the violence, and reducing recidivism? Gauthier and Levendosky (1996) state Ait is not possible to remain neutral about violence in relationships and to do so is unethical@ (p. 412). The American violence epidemic has effectively and efficiently found its way from the streets of America, into the homes of America. The luxury of being complacent about domestic violence can cost lives. Battery is the major cause of injury to women aged 14-45 causing more injuries than auto accidents, muggings, and rapes combined (Flitcraft & Stark, 1998). One half of reported domestic violence assaults result in serious bodily injury (AMA, 1992). In addition, one fifth of reported domestic violence assaults involved the use of a weapon (Flitcraft & Stark, 1998). Domestic violence statistics show that a significant number of domestic violence cases affect same sex couples, and men abused by female partners. However, male-on-female violence results in greater negative outcomes than any other types of relational violence, especially compared with female-on-male violence (Strauss, 1990). Statistics from the United States Department of Justice (1999) show that women are significantly more likely than men to be killed by an intimate partner. Women are also disproportionately victims of domestic violence and men are disproportionately the perpetrators (Browne & Williams, 1993). Regional surveys Domestic Violence Court 6 support increased rates of domestic violence against women compared to men. In a sample of 3,604 respondents from the State of Washington (2000) researchers found that 23.6% of women reported experiencing domestic violence incidents compared with 7.5% of men (Washington State Department of Health, 2000). The largest most recent population survey in the United States was the National Violence Against Women Survey, sponsored jointly by the National Institute of Justice, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000a). Researchers found that a lifetime of prevalence of physical assault and/or rape at the hands of an adult intimate partner was 25% for women and 7.6% for men (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000b). Findings also showed that intimate partner violence against women was more often accompanied by emotional abuse and controlling behaviors than intimate violence against men. In addition, 45% of women versus 20% of men reported fear of serious injury or death at the hands of an intimate partner. Women sustained injury, required medical treatment, were hospitalized, sought mental health treatment, lost work time, reported domestic violence to the police, and obtained protection orders at a greater rate then did men (Tjaden & Thoennes, 2000b). Of all female victims of homicide in the U.S. 30% are killed by husbands or boyfriends, a total of almost 1,400 women each year. In addition, a woman in the United States is beaten by her husband or boyfriend every nine seconds (Flitcraft & Stark, 1998). In light of the prevalence of male domestic violence perpetrated against women by men, this study will focus on domestic violence perpetrated by men against women. Definition of Terms Walker (1979) defined battered women as Athose who suffer from physical, sexual, or Domestic Violence Court 7 psychological abuse that is afflicted by someone with whom they are in an intimate relationship (p. 69). Other definitions of domestic violence are usually worded broadly enough to encompass a wide pattern of behavior such as threats, coercion, intimidation, and manipulation (Walker, 1979). Law enforcement more narrowly defines it as A an act by a member of a family against another member that is intended to result in physical harm, bodily assault, or a threat that reasonably places the member in fear of physical harm (Texas Department of Public Safety, 1998, p. 47). Many practitioners use the terms ADomestic Violence@ and ADomestic Abuse@ interchangeably (Walker, 1979). Domestic violence is physically and sexually abusive acts perpetrated against a woman by an intimate partner. These acts include, but are not limited to, threats of violence or acts of violence such as hitting, kicking, or other physical harm or forcing a woman to engage in sexual activity by use of physical coercion (Campbell & Samuelson, 2005). Distinguishing between physical abuse as an act or acts and battering as a pattern is critical for effective treatment. Different types of abuse typically are indicative of different types of batterers and thus necessitate different types of treatment (Campbell & Samuelson, 2005). Physical abuse may occur primarily as an expression of emotion (e.g., anger, jealousy, fear) or it may occur with the intention of controlling and intimidating (i.e., instrumental violence), in which case it would be considered battering. Battering is most often perpetrated by men in an effort to control and/or punish and is usually accompanied by not only physical abuse but also emotional abuse (Campbell & Samuelson, 2005). The New York State Office for the Prevention of Domestic Violence (2000) explains that domestic violence is also perpetuated by the use of psychological and emotional control. The spectrum of these behaviors may include but are not limited to, constant criticism, verbal threats, overprotective behavior, excessive jealousy, or Domestic Violence Court 8 undermining a woman=s abilities as a wife, partner, or mother. This may also include exerting economic control over a woman by denying her access to bank accounts, credit cards, or cash. It may also include denying her access to a job, car, family, and friends (Jacobson, 1994). Research on same sex domestic violence, and female on male domestic violence is limited and will hopefully increase as social awareness broadens. In light of the prevalence of male on female domestic violence, this study will focus on this particular type of domestic violence. Theoretical Beginnings Strategies for fighting domestic violence have evolved as theoretical conceptualizations explaining domestic violence have changed (Herman, 1992). At one point in time, it was not only acceptable for a man to beat his wife, but highly expected (Campbell & Samuelson, 2005). It has only been in the last twenty years that women being beaten by their husbands have been widely considered an abhorrent, vicious, and violent assault against another human being in shortmorally wrong (Herman, 1992). For almost two decades, the major explanations and treatment models for partner abuse have been based on social learning theory and feminist theory ( Lawson, 2003). These models have focused almost exclusively on male to female violence with most explanations for female to male violence emphasizing the defensive nature of the violence (Strauss, 1990). From a social learning theory perspective, partner abuse is learned through observing that relational violence is effective in resolving conflicts and for maintaining control over a partner (Bandura, 1979). Early theorists virtually ignored the fact that most victimization occurred without active collusion from the victim and when it did occur, it was self protective in nature (Evan & Flitcraft, 1998). Theorists portrayed a deep lack of appreciation for the impact of social roles and social Domestic Violence Court 9 expectations pertaining to violence ( Myers, 1995). Later Theorists e.g. Hindelang, Gottfredson, & Garofalo (1980) argued that >situational lifestyle factors= entered into the situation by explaining most victimization as simply a matter of being in the wrong place at the wrong time and failed to include social roles and expectations into the equation@ (Crowell & Burgess, 1996). Right up until the feminist socio-political interventions during the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's and 1970's, intimate and controlling behaviors of men against women were viewed as no place for the state to legally interfere. Feminism named domestic violence and made its effects public (Knudson & Miller, 1991). Feminism, through its social constructionist stance kept the focus on social-cultural power differentials, most notably learned gender roles, economics, and reproduction issues. This latter focus on power differentials between men and women