by Mike Willbur | Anger Management, Domestic Violence
When conducting domestic violence treatment groups, we sometimes show lists of thought distortions. A short list of thought distortions looks like this:
- All or nothing thinking
- Overgeneralization
- Mental Filter
- Discounting the positive
- Jumping to conclusions
- Catastrophizing/Minimizing
- Emotion based reasoning
- Should Statements
- Labeling
- Personalization.
There is a reason these things are not listed together with the positive aspects of your life…Because it’s not possible for happiness and sadness to co-exist. Just like it’s not possible for pride to co-exist with dignity.
Most aggressive thinking and behaviors stem from attachment problems which were developed during childhood, most likely before the age of 2-3 years of age when a child is in a quest to be autonomous and at the same time, seek comfort from a attachment figure, most likely the mother but not always.
This is a time when anxiety is sometimes born and embedded into the character of the child. This character may progress to levels of maladaptive behavior if no intervention is employed to head off the label of “personality disorder.”
These early childhood experiences can sometimes evolve into character traits that are not conducive to healthy intimate partner relationships. One of the reasons domestic violence is so dangerous is because those with a maladaptive personality trait will almost never seek out help because they don’t see their trait as a problem – it’s always the other person’s problem.
If you have anxieties based on adverse childhood experiences and have also, relationship difficulties, such as being one who craves the argument versus the solution or feel you are being rejected when someone (especially a partner) criticizes you, why wait until the police are called when you finally resort to physical violence to get your point across or to simply use intimidation to gain that control you so desperately need?
The solution to our domestic violence problem lies not just with the treatment of the offender but a proactive relationship with Law Enforcement, Shelters, Schools, families. One part of the solution is in treatment of the offender and the other let’s call….”Community Based Solution Focused Counseling.”
by Mike Willbur | Anger Management, Domestic Violence, Familicide
Being classified as a DV perpetrator is probably the broadest way to categorize someone into the one-size fits all group. For the sake of this post, I will speak in terms of low level, medium, and high risk categories of perpetrators of domestic violence.
First, let me say that I am aware of the many groups of advocates and social activists who are doing great work in terms of caring for the victims of partner violence – that is their share of this pie. Also, even though DV can be perpetrated by both females and males, it is predominate among males and so, I refer only to the males as perpetrators in this article.
Now, on with what I’d like to say about the subject of classification of those who commit crimes against their intimate partners.
In many of the interviews of DV perpetrators I have conducted, there was a distinction between what we all know to be a “Batterer” and a person who could be placed into a category of an immature person who is incapable of coping with life as an adult simply because they did not learn this skill for some reason. This person could be placed in a high risk category if the intensity of the violence was/could cause harm to the household (anyone under the same roof). Also, if this person was abusing drugs/alcohol and was under the influence during the assaultive behavior. That is not to say that substance abuse causes intimate partner violence (IPV), but it can be a factor when considering just how dangerous a person really is and how intense the violence can be.
Let’s say that this low level person does not use drugs or alcohol, is married and is fairly young, as is the partner they are married to (Around 20). They are just getting started in life and are struggling with making financial ends meet month to month. Both are products of low income homes and chaotic lifestyles while growing up. One or both of them have parents who have divorced and were ultimately raised without any role models present in their lives.
The above is a recipe for coping disasters in most relationships but can it be defined as domestic violence? I think in most States, it would if going by the letter of the law but are there elements of power and control which is found in most battering situations? What is the real fix for a mutually combative couple like this?
My answer to that question is to have a DV evaluation done by using testing instruments which have been empirically proven as valid and reliable (if there are any questions about the incident being mutually combative, an evaluation on both parties could re victimize the victim). With a comprehensive interview and the testing, the evaluation will be more accurate than if not tested.
Still, if both parties are evaluated, the same counselor should not do both. This does not mean it would be okay to treat the couple conjointly. A review of any Police incident reports is useful to compare versions of an incident too. A trained domestic violence counselor should be able to come to conclusions about how to classify after the evaluation.
What would automatically put a person in either the medium or high risk class in my opinion, is the underlying belief about the relationship they are in. Does the perpetrator believe his spouse is his to do with as he wishes? Or does he assume that by virtue of gender, there are certain responsibilities attached to the relationship? In other words, is there an abnormal attachment in play? Those type of thought distortions need to be worked through and if not, most likely the only thing that may take place during DV treatment is to make a shift from one type of abusive behavior to another. No real change is taking place in that scenario.
The high risk (serial batterer) perpetrator is not ready or willing to change and this should be recognized during the evaluation period, prior to treatment. If the person who has been found guilty of assaulting a family member is not ready for change then everyone concerned is probably wasting their time (the only person in control of changing behavior is the person who needs change). I am not part of the punitive process rather a presenter of alternative routes.
As a mental health professional, I concern myself with what can be done to help my client achieve their emotional goals. I should be able to figure out in a few sessions if this person is ready for change and if not, then I am compelled to terminate the therapeutic relationship.
Domestic Violence treatment should be no different in that regard. We should be held accountable ethically for keeping those in treatment who are not compliant or are not changing. This requires a counselor to constantly and ongoing, evaluate and re-evaluate their DV perpetrator clients to ensure change is taking place.
And finally, it has been and is still being said that domestic violence is not about mental health rather behavior that needs to change. And as that may be true – especially when a Court is sentencing a person convicted of assaulting family (DV) when all they are concerned about is stopping the behavior and the safety of the victim/s, it takes a professional who is willing to consider the personal history of the perpetrator and discover a way to deliver a message about non-violence in a palatable manner so that real change can take place. It is time to look past mandated treatment curriculum to augment the didactic platform with appropriate counseling techniques that effect real personal change. Otherwise, the only change likely to take place is the change from one abusive behavior to another…
If after an evaluation of a person who has been charged with a DV crime, it is determined he is not in the category of a batterer (in the sense that he believes he is entitled to the power and control), then you have ruled out the need for DV treatment. It does open up the idea of, “what is appropriate treatment for this person who is violent but for different reasons than what we define as IPV?” (note to self…imposing oneself on a partner against their will either physically or psychologically automatically qualifies them for DV treatment).
The Court has the final say but I always render my professional opinion on the matter and the court will make its decision. I am not the one who is prosecuting the client but I am the one who may be charged with doing the treatment and when asked, I submit reports regardless of the outcome. There are times when there has been a conviction for a DV crime and as a result, the court orders a DV evaluation. If I have ruled out DV behavior, I will not recommend mandated DV treatment rather something more appropriate for this particular client. Now, that doesn’t mean that person won’t get DV treatment – most of the time when they are guilty according to the statute, they end up in DV treatment. I consider though, the Court has discretion in how it sentences assault against a family member. If asked by the court for a professional opinion, I give it regardless of how the testing and evaluation turns out. This way, the court can make a more informed decision.
I do not decide whether a person is guilty or not of a crime rather, I do DV evaluations as requested and do them according to our Judge’s manual for our State. I utilize all of my DV experience as well as my mental health experience – remembering that DV is not a mental health condition rather a behavior that needs to change, it is helpful though, to have therapeutic skills to help with the change process. There is so much more involved with domestic violence than the treatment of the perpetrator; that is just part of it…
I submit this with respect for all treatment providers and realize there are many schools of thought about DV – I am just one.
by Mike Willbur | Domestic Violence, Uncategorized
A domestic violence perpetrator treatment program must focus treatment primarily on ending the participant’s physical, sexual, and psychological abuse. The primary goal of a domestic violence perpetrator treatment program must be to increase the victim’s safety by:
- Facilitating change in the participant’s abusive behavior; and
- Holding the participant accountable for changing the participant’s patterns of behaviors, thinking, and beliefs.
The minimum treatment period is the time required for the participant to fulfill all conditions of treatment set by the treatment program. Satisfactory completion of treatment is not based solely on a perpetrator participating in the treatment program for a certain period of time or attending a certain number of sessions. - The program must require participants to attend treatment and satisfy all treatment program requirements for at least twelve consecutive months.
- The program must require the participant to attend:
(a) A minimum of twenty-six consecutive weekly same gender group sessions, followed by:
(b) Monthly sessions with the treatment provider until the twelve-month period is complete. These sessions must be conducted face-to-face with the participant by program staff who meet the minimum qualifications set forth in this chapter.
by Mike Willbur | PTSD, Uncategorized
Treatment for PTSD will depend on the needs and desires of the person seeking treatment. Some of the most common modalities for treatment of PTSD are listed below:
Behavioral or Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT)
This approach looks at ways in which a person thinks about a problem, learned to certain triggers associated with that problem and ways in which thinking affects the emotional state. This treatment often uses a combination of exposure (deliberately thinking about an event or confronting a trigger) and relaxation training along with cognitive restructuring or changing thoughts or beliefs about that event or trigger. This process tends to desensitize a person’s response to reminders of the event so that it no longer carries the same emotional impact. This can be a very effective treatment.
Eye Movement Desensitization and Reprocessing (EMDR)
This modality uses exposure to the traumatic memory paired with “bilateral stimulation” of the brain by tracking the therapist’s finger or string of lights with the eyes or listening to alternating tones. Current thoughts, feelings, physical sensations and beliefs are activated and the tracking helps to reduce emotional and physiological reaction to the memory. This desensitization helps to process negative beliefs about themselves to adaptive, healthy and more accurate beliefs. There have been numerous studies over the years on EMDR and has shown to be a rapid and effective treatment for PTSD.
Group Therapy
Group therapy can be helpful following a traumatic event as it provides a safe and supportive environment in which to discuss a shared experience with others. There is often a felt sense that nobody understands and a group can help a person to feel less alienated, normalizing reactions to an abnormal event.
Medication
Medication is an option but many avoid this as they may feel stigmatized for doing so. Traumatic events can influence the neurochemistry of the body and brain, impacting the person in many ways. Excessive stress hormones can make it difficult to concentrate, relax or even sleep. They can increase blood pressure, muscle tension, skin conductance and general arousal levels. Traumatic events can also impair immune system functioning, making people more vulnerable to illness. Medication can be an effective way to reset these levels in the brain and may prove to be very helpful for a period.
by Mike Willbur | Anger Management, Domestic Violence
I know a couple (man and wife) who have very distinct and traditional roles in their marriage. The husband is the bread winner and the wife manages the home, which includes balancing the check book and budget. If you were to see this couple walking together hand in hand in the mall, you would not guess this is the case. They are content with what they have and don’t seek to get what they cannot afford. Their finances are well balanced with the spending, and if they decide together that they would like something new for the house, it is discussed between the two and decided upon.
The children are well disciplined and show signs that they know about personal hygiene and grooming. Sometimes the children fight amongst themselves, and the parents let them resolve (within guidelines) the problems on their own.
The parents are continuously talking to the children about their future and the schooling that has to do with that future. The children are not heavily influenced by the outside world, but the parents know they will soon begin confiding in their peers about what they deem important. The parents know this and are not resistant to the fact that it is coming and coming soon. The parents figure they have until the children turn 12 or 13 until that transition. After that, they will only act as support and take on a new role as covert protector. The parents will tell the children about boundaries and let them know that they will respect theirs provided they stay safe.
The children, by then, will understand about the human growth process and how the brain works going from early childhood – adolescence, to adulthood. They will have been trained to think before acting on something (even though they will slip from time to time) and will be aware that the parents will not judge them harshly for petty errors.
The children learn more from watching and listening to their parents in the background when the parents don’t think they are listening. The parents know this, so they are careful about what they discuss in the open and save the secrets for an appropriate time and place.
The parents watch closely and reward the children as they grow. They don’t forget to allow the children to express themselves and they teach them about love by not telling them about it rather, by showing them how they love each other as husband and wife on a daily basis.
The parents are convinced that their children will be able to cope because as this family grew, the children witnessed their parents in conflict. Sometimes it was resolved and sometimes not. Sometimes there was compromise and acceptance and was always a win win scenario. The children saw that there doesn’t have to be one who triumphs over another; they saw their parents in a collaboration. They will not understand it until they reach maturity but nonetheless, they have learned it by witnessing it throughout their upbringing.
This is only one perspective on what a marriage should look like, and I am sure there are many more. I am not a feminist – nor am I misogynistic. I realize there are many different lifestyles, and I am not judgmental if it happens to not be like mine.
