The Effectiveness of Batterer Intervention Systems

1. The Effectiveness of Batterer Intervention Systems October 27, 2006 Special Dockets Conference Supreme Court of Ohio Larry Bennett University of Illinois at Chicago

2. Contact E-Mail: lwbenn@uic.edu These slides: www.uic.edu/~lwbenn/lwb/ohiobips2006.ppt

3. Things to Worry About • Are batterers criminals, normals, mentally disordered, or all three? If so, what systems should intervene? • Should we have standards for intervention? • What is the victim’s role in preventing violence?

4. Why are so many batterers men of color and so many service providers white? • How many female batterers are out there? • What are the links between substance abuse and battering? • Are current programs for batterers effective? If so, does one size fit all?

5. First Things First . . . How rare is a batterer in a batterer program?

6. 65 of 1,000 IPV events are detected by authorities • 212 of 1,000 detected IPV events lead to arrest • 530 of 1,000 IPV arrests lead to conviction • 520 of 1,000 convictions result in punishment, so . . . • Less than 4 of every 1000 IPV events are punished by any sort of probation, fine, or jail Dutton, 1988

7. Getting to the BIP • (X) Cook County IL has 1,889,934 men age 18 or older (2000 US Census) • estimate batterers in Cook Co IL (Y) (from Straus & Gelles, 1989) • Y  x/12 = 157,491 • (Z) In the year 2000, the Social Service Dept.(SSD) disposed 1,905 new men for intervention related to domestic violence • Z/Y = 0.012 (1.2%) . . . the approximate probability of getting into treatment in Cook County Illinoisif you batter (12 per 1,000 batterers, 48 per 1,000,000 IPV events) • Conclude: Referral to a BIP is a rare event

8. Typical US BIP • 1.5 to 3 hours for 16 to 52 weeks • Semi-structured group process • manualized, pro-feminist cognitive-behavioral • Most popular U.S. models: DULUTH, EMERGE, DAP, RAVEN, AMEND • Mixed competency & time-served approach • Co-facilitated (male-female team)

9. BIP Goals & Measureable Indicators • JUSTICE • Completes program • Sanctioned for non-compliance • REHABILITATION • Improves attitude toward women • Makes behavioral changes • PUBLIC/VICTIM SAFETY • Practices non-violence (not re-arrested; no re-offense per victim report) • Accepts responsibility for control and violence

10. Today’s Take-home Points • Half of men in BIPs do not complete • BIPs are effective for some men, but not for others • A small group of men (1 in 5) account for most re-assaults • Anger management alone is not effective • Attitudes are difficult to change • Community response is as important as program model or batterer characteristics

11. Controlled Experiments

12. Useful Findings From Uncontrolled Experiments and Quasi-Experiments • BIP effective only if attends 75% of groups (Chen, 1989) • No significant differences between self-help, educational, and combined models (Edleson & Syers, 1990) • No difference between weekly and twice weekly intensities (Edleson & Syers, 1990) • Men with high dependency do better in unstructured program; men with antisocial orientation do better in cognitive-behavioral program (Saunders, 1996) • Completion of BIP reduces DV re-arrest by 61% (Bennett et al, 2006)

13. The Multisite StudyGondolf (1994-2002) • N=840 batterers and their partners • Four big, established (>20 yr) BIPs (Pittsburg, Houston, Dallas, Denver) • Pittsburg was pretrial , others were sentenced • Valid & reliable measures • Interviewed victim and new partners every 3 months for 4 years • Monitored arrests

15. Re-Assault • Cumulative (Partner Report) • Intake to 15 mos 32% • Intake to 30 mos 37% • Intake to 48 mos 42% • Re-arrest 48 mos 11% • Majority of men in BIP stop being violent • @4 years after intake, 90% of BIP participants have been nonviolent for at least the past year

17. Predicting Re-assault • Predicting re-assault at intake • History of severe partner abuse • History of non-DV arrest • Severe mental disorder • Predicting re-assault during the program • Women’s feeling of safety • Drunkenness • Almost all re-assaulters “get away with it”

18. Moving On • At intake, 50% of batterers are no longer living with the index victim • At 30 mos after intake, 20% of the men have new partners • 25% of these new partners have already been assaulted • Most men who assault new partners continue to assault old partners

19. Motivation: Voluntary v. Mandated Referrals • Voluntary referrals twice as likely to drop out as court referrals (61% v. 33%) • Voluntary referrals more likely to re-assault at 15 mos (44% v. 29%)

20. What Victims Say • 2 of every 3 women report they are Better Off after BIP • At 48 mos, 84% of victims report they are Very Unlikely to be battered and 85% feel Very Safe

23. Conclusions Outcome • Batterer programs have a significant effect that is not explained by other factors • Program completion reduces probability of re-assault by 46% if man is court ordered • Most participants eventually remain nonviolent for extended period • A small group of men account for most of the re-assaults

24. Batterer Intervention Systems

25. Community Intervention Systems • Coordinated community efforts more effective than singular batterer program (Babcock & Steiner, 1999; Murphy, Musser, & Maton, 1998; Syers & Edleson, 1992) • Systemic response to non-compliance may be more important than personal characteristics of offenders (Frank, 1999)

26. System Recommendations from Multisite Study • Coordinated Community Response • Periodic court review (DV Court) • Assertive case management & risk review • Support & safety planning with female partners • Swift and certain response to re-assault, dropout, and non-compliance

27. Program Recommendations • Existing programs adequate w/ changes • Rapid (pre-trial?) intake to program • Ongoing monitoring of substance use, emotional/psychiatric problems, re-offense • Intensive (2-3x/week) intervention for prior/severe offenders for first month • Victim support

28. Summary • BIPS are important alternatives in a coordinated community response • System must find a way to deal with the bad guys • BIP standards must encourage experimentation and program development

29. Changing the Paradigm • We are all bystanders to violations of human rights • Gender-based hate crime • Activism to increase community intolerance of violence against women is our most effective response • BIPs must not be the only alternative for dealing with batterers

30. Thank You!