Violence against women and their children will not stop until perpetrators cease being violent.
The Council is resolute that perpetrators of violence against women must be held accountable for their use of violence and challenged to change their behaviour. Accountability means ensuring that consequences follow if violence against women is perpetrated, and that this occurs at the individual, community and system levels.
We know little about the ways that the many different sectors and professions involved with perpetrators can complement and enhance each other’s work, and what sort of social policy will facilitate this endeavour. The Plan of Action offers strategies and actions to progress this work. Although the best means to undertake specific interventions requires future research, the Council believes approaches to perpetrators must:
- ensure that women and their children are protected and safe;
- hold perpetrators to account and ensure they take responsibility for their violent behaviour;
- stop perpetrators’ violent behaviour and change their violence-supportive attitudes;
- sustain positive change in perpetrators’ behaviour and allow them to redefine themselves as non-violent; and
- subject to considerations for the safety of the victim/survivor, allow perpetrators to re-enter the community and engage in positive ways.
There are many ways the justice system can respond to perpetrators of violence. The likelihood of recidivism can be reduced through deterrents such as sentencing, through community restraints such as parole, through incapacity such as prolonged incarceration, or through effective rehabilitation236. There is limited evidence that the prospect of imprisonment alone deters violence against women and their children that convicted perpetrators change their violent behaviour without, or even through, court-mandated programs237, or that the adversarial nature of Australia’s legal system does not inadvertently encourage perpetrators to deny and avoid responsibility for their violence.
Further research is needed to look specifically at the effectiveness of incarceration, deterrence and community restraint in reducing recidivism in cases of violence perpetrated against women and their children.
'Locking up the perpetrator at least gives the family a break from the violence and a chance for them all to get a good night's sleep for a change. But something needs to be done to change his behaviour or it just becomes a repeating pattern - and that's really a pretty hopeless outlook.'
Police officer in regional Australia, 2008
Australian and international research shows that rehabilitative programs can be effective in reducing recidivism238. In Australia, the majority of responses to perpetrators of sexual assault and domestic and family violence attempt to place them into some form of rehabilitation program. The Council’s Plan of Action explores strategies to improve the effectiveness of rehabilitation programs to change men’s violent behaviour.
[ top ]
Current perpetrator program approaches
Perpetrator programs aim to prevent violence by changing the attitudes and behaviour of participants through individual counselling, case management, and group programs. Programs may be court-mandated or voluntary. Some are run in parallel with programs that work closely with, and support, the abused partners. This ensures that women’s and children’s safety needs remain paramount when challenging violent male behaviour.
There is no nationally consistent approach to perpetrator programs, with variations in content, duration, practices, philosophical and therapeutic frameworks, and evaluation methods used by providers239. In fact, the service deliverers and academics who contribute to knowledge and program development in this area are diverse and disconnected. Those working in the area of sexual offending generally have very little to do with those whose expertise is in the area of domestic and family violence. There are few mechanisms in place for them to contribute to each other’s academic knowledge, practice wisdom, and program design for service delivery.
'Treatment of sexual and violent offending focuses on behaviour change, and is based on evidence regarding cognitive-behavioural change, providing the dose and intensity matched to the offence seriousness, forming a therapeutic alliance, supporting pro-social alternative behaviours etc while current domestic violence programs focus on structural and social change. Treatment is coerced to varying degrees and it is time for the individual and structural approaches to be combined to maximise the reduction of violence in men.'
Senior Corrections Practitioner, 2008
Perpetrators’ access to programs also varies greatly across Australia. Only in Victoria, Western Australia, Tasmania, the ACT and the Northern Territory does the relevant domestic violence legislation make specific provision for referral to perpetrator programs, either as part of the civil protection order process or, in the criminal context, as a condition of sentencing or bail. Access is also dictated by what is available in a locality, rather than what intervention is needed, or is most likely to be effective.
Through the written submissions, personal interviews with perpetrators and the specialist roundtables, the Council repeatedly heard the call for an increase in the availability of programs for perpetrators, tailored to respond to the nature of their offending. Accompanying the call for tailored programs was the call for research into the characteristics of programs that are proven to be effective in changing men’s behaviour. There were also repeated calls for men’s behaviour change programs, including those delivered through Corrections, to include a focus on the needs (particularly the safety needs) of the victim/survivor.
Types of perpetrator programs
Designing and delivering perpetrator treatment programs for sex offenders proves a particularly complex matter because of the different causal factors and types of offending. Studies indicate that treatment programs are most effective when designed to match the different types of offending. For example, interventions that work for some sex offenders may not work for serial rapists. Factors indicating the ability to treat sex offenders include:
- the nature of the offence;
- the type of offender;
- whether the offender accepts responsibility;
- their motivation to change240.
In Australia, most behaviour change programs for men who use violence in their intimate relationships use group work processes that grew from the foundational Domestic Abuse Intervention Project (DAIP)241, commonly known as the ‘Duluth model’. Key best practice principles evident in these programs include:
- holding the perpetrator responsible for his use of violence;
- building connections and/or accountability to victim services;
- establishing programs with an equivalent victim service operating in parallel;
- reinforcing that violence is learned and therefore can be unlearned.
The principle of connecting family and domestic violence victims to perpetrator programs is genuinely difficult for some correctional institutions where there is no mandate to work with the partners of the offenders. The Plan of Action addresses this difficulty by suggesting the development of best practice prison-based programs, incorporating rigorous evaluation, for perpetrators of domestic and family violence.
Regardless of the approach, it is significant that few programs have been comprehensively evaluated over the long term for their effectiveness in stopping men’s violence. Also, evidence on whether these programs reduce violence against women and their children is contentious. For example, evidence tends to be limited by a reliance on criminal justice data on re-offending rates and does not count the views or experiences of victims/survivors (who may not report incidents to police). One study found that 15 months after participation in a perpetrator program, 40 per cent of participants had re-offended, and 30 months after, another 20 per cent had re-offended (including two men who murdered their partners)242.
In addition to the lack of research, a number of issues were raised in consultations and submissions about the practices that support perpetrator rehabilitation programs, including:
- the lack of consequences for men who do not comply with program requirements;
- that programs are often not structured on a gendered analysis of violence against women, so do not require men to take responsibility for their actions;
- failure to assess the safety of the victim and her children as integral to the intake and assessment process for the perpetrator’s suitability to participate in the program; and failure to continually reassess this risk throughout the perpetrator’s period of treatment;
- the absence of national standards and benchmarks for perpetrator behaviour change programs and services, although there are state-by-state guidelines;
- the reality that perpetrators of domestic and family violence are frequently misdirected into anger management programs.
[ top ]
Effectiveness of programs
Early work in this area suggests the most effective perpetrator programs operate as a recognised part of a broader, integrated response to violence against women and their children. Similar to the Duluth model, they link women’s domestic violence services, sexual assault victims’ services, courts, police, corrections and child protection services, and they coordinate risk assessment and interventions243. Gondolf’s multi-site, seven year evaluation of domestic violence perpetrator intervention programs supports this approach, concluding that 'the system matters. Program outcome is, for instance, likely to be improved with swift and certain court referral, periodic court review of specialised probation surveillance and ongoing risk management'244. However, there is also evidence from a recent comprehensive Campbell Collaboration Systematic Review that court-ordered domestic violence perpetrator programs for men do not effectively reduce recidivism. The authors concluded that the criminal justice system would benefit from considering other forms of intervention in addition to the Duluth model, although they did not recommend any alternative models. They recommended additional research to:
- be applied to larger representative samples instead of selected small samples;
- retain victims/survivors longer to determine the positive and negative outcomes;
- determine whether official reports and victim/survivor report measures are valid and reliable245.
Perpetrator programs must also be more broadly evaluated to understand what works effectively. Such research should include:
- an examination of the principles and theory underpinning the program content; and of the approach it takes to working with women partners and managing issues of safety246;
- a focus on the capacity of the program to respond appropriately to perpetrators from a range of backgrounds and from different geographical locations (for example urban, rural and remote areas);
- an assessment of the impact the program is having on reducing violence against women and their children.
Sustaining behaviour change
When perpetrators take responsibility and have been held accountable for their use of violence, with primary consideration given to the safety of the victim/survivor, responses should enable perpetrators to positively re-enter the community. The potential for re-integration is a powerful incentive for perpetrators to change their violent behaviour, and enables them to draw on social networks to support this change. In Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities, there is a great deal of evidence that sustaining any perpetrator behaviour change following interventions requires both participation in community-based behaviour change maintenance programs247, and the re-integration of the perpetrator into the community248.
Recognising diversity
The prevalence data on violence against women indicates that the highest proportion of violence is committed against women by men known to them249. The Personal Safety Survey indicated women also use violence in some relationships. However, when it comes to violence by partners or ex-partners, women are far more likely than men to be subjected to frequent, prolonged and extreme violence, to sustain injuries, to be subjected to a range of controlling strategies, to fear for their lives, to be sexually assaulted, to experience post-separation violence, and to use violence only in self-defence250 251 252 253 254.
Violence against women does cut across gender lines. This is evident when a range of types of abuse are used by a lesbian partner, or when women are violent to children and men in their extended families. It is also evident in carer relationships where women carers abuse women with disabilities or elderly women.
Regardless of the gender of the perpetrator of the violence, they must be held accountable for their actions. At the present time most attention has focused on perpetrator programs for men who commit sexual assault, domestic or family violence. The complexity of the issue requires significant changes to perpetrator program design and evaluation. At the same time, there is a specific gap in our current research, and practice knowledge regarding the most effective treatment options, and criminal justice responses, that focus specifically on women who commit violence in lesbian relationships, or in their roles as carers.
The availability of perpetrator programs in rural, remote, and isolated areas is very limited. Research suggests that more innovative ways of delivering programs to end violence need to be developed for such communities, taking account of confidentiality and potential stigmatisation of individuals by the community255.
'It is time to leave the old ‘one size fits all’ mainstreaming approach behind. It has not helped Aboriginal communities in the past and will not work in the future. Aboriginal communities need to be empowered and given opportunities to develop their own practical solutions to the issues affecting Aboriginal men and their families and their communities. Culturally appropriate men’s groups, men’s spaces, timeout spaces and healing centres are all important parts of the solution. These places allow Aboriginal men to support each other and provide a safe environment where men can discuss issues affecting themselves, their families and their communities. Aboriginal men can stop the cycle of abuse in their communities but need support and resources to enable them to make this happen.'
Babana Aboriginal Men’s Group Incorporated, 2008
It is wrong to attribute causal explanation for the violence to the specific culture of individuals256. Violence against women and their children occurs in all cultures . However, it is vital to appreciate cultural difference when seeking solutions.
In our diverse country, interpreters are an essential part of effective responses to violence against women. However, there are unique requirements for any interpreter who works with perpetrators (and victims/survivors) of sexual assault, domestic and family violence – and appropriate screening and selection of interpreters for these specific circumstances is critical257. Further, counsellors need to develop competencies in cross-cultural communication and the process of interpreting.
[ top ]
Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perpetrators
The nature and history of oppression and violence experienced by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women is very different to the context in which violence against non-Indigenous women has typically occurred258. Alternative approaches to accountability are particularly important for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander perpetrators of violence. Risk factors for committing violence against women and children are compounded by the disadvantage and social exclusion experienced in many Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities.
These compounding factors have been described as a broader kind of violence experienced by the whole community as a result of historical dispossession and contemporary marginalisation caused by the breaking of parental and cultural authority, and the policies of child removal (the Stolen Generations); and/or barriers of language and discrimination. Such lateral violence259 or transgenerational trauma260 contributes to violence forming part of socialisation, and a sense of hopelessness and powerlessness for both the perpetrator and the victim. This is not to excuse, or attempt to justify, Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander men’s violence against women, but to contextualise that violence and seek strategies to stop it that are relevant and supported by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander women.
'We know that there is a strong potential to rebuild self-esteem through learning about our culture. We see it in the prisons where we see positive results in rehabilitation of serious and violent offenders by providing programs where they can learn about their culture through artistic programs, literacy programs and programs on Aboriginal Studies.'
Larissa Behrendt
Professor of Law and Director of Research
Jumbunna Indigenous House of Learning
University of Technology Sydney, 2008
Evidence shows that any program response to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander offending must be embedded within a design and delivery method that considers the broader historical and cultural context of Indigenous people’s lives. Some have gone so far as to say that programs that focus on the strength and resilience of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people have the potential to support their recovery from colonisation; such approaches are often referred to as ‘healing approaches’261.
Healing approaches
Indigenous concepts of ‘healing’ are relevant to responding to community-wide and intergenerational violence. Healing is based on addressing the relationship between the physical, emotional, cultural and spiritual in a holistic manner. An essential element of Indigenous healing involves recognising the interconnections between violence, social and economic disadvantage, racism, and the effects of the dispossession from their land and culture on Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, communities and families. Healing is not a program, it is a process. Often it involves a family-based approach. Healing in the context of criminal justice attempts to help the individual deal with the reasons why they have offended in the first place. This element of healing is strongly linked to the notion of restorative justice262 263 .
'Restorative justice is a viable alternative that must be considered in circumstances where Indigenous people are disproportionately represented in correctional centres. Restorative justice incorporates a process that empowers Indigenous peoples...one method... is the use of sentencing (healing) circles...the foundations of a lore system for Indigenous people are embedded in principles of social justice and the restoration of peace and good order.'264
The Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Women’s Taskforce on Violence report
2000
This includes consideration of the capacity of communities to establish and implement local responses, and strategies to build and support them. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander customary law must be applied consistently within human rights standards; at no stage does customary law override the rights of women and children to be safe and to live free from violence265.
Another approach that has been trialled in some Aboriginal communities is the provision of alternative places or spaces for men to go voluntarily to talk to each other about their issues, or be taken if they are affected by alcohol and are possibly aggressive. Such places, along with the appropriate services, allow the issue of family violence within communities to be identified and tackled rather than hidden. They also enable women and children to remain in their home, with the perpetrator of violence removed for a period.
A combination of strategies, or holistic approaches, is frequently advocated by Indigenous communities.
'Composite programs comprise several sub-programs which may (a) target different forms of violence in a community; (b) target different categories of offenders or victims; or (c) employ different methods of combating or preventing violence. When a composite program is devised to systematically deal with all types of violence in a community, it is often termed a holistic approach or a holistic program.'
Memmott, P. Stacy, R. Chambers, C., and Keys, C.
2001
[ top ]
Strategies and actions
To ensure that perpetrators stop their violence, the Plan of Action identifies four key strategies:
5.1 Change behaviours through appropriate programs.
5.2 Increase access to early intervention initiatives.
5.3 Sustain behaviour change.
5.4 Build the evidence base.
5.1 Change behaviours through appropriate programs
5.1.1 Fund and develop correctional facility-specific domestic violence programs to be tested in Australian prisons.
5.1.2 Fund a national conference every two years to share information on what works with regard to perpetrator services and programs, and develop communities of practice.
5.1.3 Develop standards, benchmarks and models for behaviour change programs and services for perpetrators that take account of individual differences and the typology of their violence; and create incentives for their participation.
5.1.4 Ensure that men serving custodial sentences for crimes of violence against women have access to behaviour change programs as early as possible and certainly before their release.
5.1.5 Increase the availability, range and evaluation of perpetrator programs that meet standard principles, particularly in rural and remote areas.
5.1.6 Develop best practice programs to address violence in lesbian relationships and to prevent violence in carer relationships.
5.2 Increase access to early intervention initiatives
5.2.1 Support remote communities to agree to develop alternative places to which men are able to go, or to be taken to, at the earliest point that violent behaviour or its precursors are exhibited.
5.2.2 Develop initiatives that change attitudes and behaviours of young people at the earliest point that sexually deviant, violent, bullying, abusive or humbugging behaviours are exhibited.
5.2.3 Increase funding to men’s counselling and support services that meet the standards of practice, including telephone support services, to help men reach out for support when they recognise the antecedents to violence and provide support for non-violent behaviour.
5.3 Sustain behaviour change
5.3.1 Increase community-based maintenance and follow up services for individuals, families and communities that enable perpetrators to maintain changes to their attitudes and behaviour.
5.3.2 Strengthen post-release transition services to ensure perpetrators have access to education and training, employment assistance and family counselling, where required.
5.4 Build the evidence base
5.4.1 Fund and deliver a perpetrator research agenda, including longitudinal research that has a particular focus on: what changes problem behaviour; what maintains behaviour change; the utility of risk assessment tools; the effectiveness of various recidivism reduction strategies; and takes account of different offender characteristics and cultures.
5.4.2 To further understandings of the cycle of violence and the intergenerational transmission of violence, undertake research to identify the impacts of daily trauma on the developing brain of children who are victims of sexual assault and domestic and family violence, and the intersection of these impacts on their life-long ability to self-regulate and control their behaviour as adults.
5.4.3 Develop methods to evaluate perpetrator programs that are consistent with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultures.
[ top ]
References
Atkinson, J. (2002) Trauma Trails, Recreating Song Lines: The transgenerational effects of trauma in Indigenous Australia, North Melbourne: Spinifex Press.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (2005) Personal Safety Survey, ABS Cat. No. 4906.0, Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
Australian Bureau of Statistics (1996) Women’s Safety, Australia, ABS Cat. No. 4128.0, Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
Belknap, J. and Melton, H. (2005) Are heterosexual men also victims of intimate partner abuse? VAWnet National Electronic Network on Violence Against Women, Applied Research Forum, March 2005.
Chung, D. and O’Leary, P. (no date) Working with men who use violence, Research and Education Unit on Gendered Violence, University of South Australia. Available from: <http://www.ofw.facs.gov.au/downloads/pdfs/presentations/working_with_men_who_use_violence_Patrick_O'Leary.ppt>, accessed November 2008.
Chung, D. and Zannettino, L. (2005/2006) 'Feminists researching domestic violence perpetrator programs: improving women's and children's safety or misplaced effort?' Women Against Violence: An Australian Feminist Journal, Issue 18, 2005–06.
Cox, D. (2008) ‘Working with Indigenous survivors of sexual assault’, ACSSA Wrap No.5, Melbourne: Australian Institute of Family Studies.
Dimopoulos, M. (2007) ‘Blaming and Claiming Culture,’ Presentation AIJA Conference, Culture and Law.
Dobash, R.P. and Dobash, R.E. (2004) ‘Women’s violence to men in intimate relationships: Working on a puzzle’, British Journal of Criminology, vol. 44, issue 3.
Drabsch, T. (2006) ‘Reducing the Risk of Recidivism’, NSW Parliamentary Library Research Service Briefing Paper No 15/06. Sydney.
Feder, L. Wilson, D. B. and Austin, S. (2008) Court-mandated interventions for individuals convicted of domestic violence: a Campbell Collaboration Systematic Review, accessed January 2009.
Flood, M. (2006) ‘Violence against women and men in Australia: what the Personal Safety Survey can and can’t tell us about domestic violence.’ Domestic Violence Resource Centre Newsletter, Summer 2006.
Flood, M. (2003) ‘Domestic Violence’ in Kimmel, M. and Aronson, A. (eds.) Encyclopedia of Men and Masculinities. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-Clio Press.
Gondolf, E.W. (2002) Batterer Intervention Systems: Issues, Outcomes and Recommendations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Gordon, M. (2000) ‘Definitional issues in violence against women: Surveillance and research from a violence research perspective’, Violence Against Women, vol. 6, no.7, August.
Howells, K. Heseltine, K. Sarre, R. Davey, L. and Day, A. (2004) Correctional Offender Rehabilitation Programs: the National Picture in Australia, Report for Criminology Research Council, University of South Australia, May 2004.
Huggins, J. (1994) ‘A contemporary view of Aboriginal women’s relationship to the white women’s movement’ in Grieve, N. and Burns, A. (eds.) Australian Women: Contemporary Feminist Thought. Oxford University Press: Melbourne.
Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (2006) ‘Ending family violence and abuse in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander communities: Key Issues,’ An overview paper of research and findings by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission 2001-2006, Sydney: Commonwealth of Australia.
Jamieson, S. and Wendt, S. (2008) ‘Exploring men’s perpetrator programs in small rural communities,’ Rural Society, April 2008, accessed November 2008.
Jones, R. Masters, M. Griffiths, A. and Moulday, N. (2002) 'Culturally relevant assessment of Indigenous offenders: A literature review', Australian Psychologist, vol. 37, pp. 187-197.
Langton, M. (2008) ‘The end of ‘big men’ politics’ Griffith Review, Edition 22, accessed November 2008.
Lucashenko, M. (1997) ‘Violence against indigenous women: public and private dimensions' in Cook, S. and Bessant, J. (eds.) Women’s Encounters with Violence: Australian Experiences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Lucashenko, M. (1994) ‘No other truth? Aboriginal women and Australian feminism' in Social Alternatives, vol. 12, no. 2. Brisbane: University of Queensland and University of Central Queensland Press.
Lievore, D. (2004) Recidivism of Sexual Assault Offenders: Rates, Risk Factors and Treatment Efficacy. Canberra: Australian Institute of Criminology.
Memmott, P. Stacy, R. Chambers, C. and Keys C. (2001) Violence in Indigenous Communities. Canberra: National Crime Prevention, Commonwealth of Australia.
Pence. E. and Paymar, M. (1993) The Duluth Domestic Abuse Intervention Project. New York: Springer Publishing.
Oda, M. and Joyette, D. (2003) ‘Interpreting for the Perpetrator in the Partner Assault Response Program: The Selection and Training Process’ in Brunette, L. Bastin, G. Hemlin, I. and Clarke, H. (eds.) The Critical Link 3: Interpreters in the Community. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
[ top ]