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.
