The CHANGE Project
Confronting Domestic Violence: An Innovative Criminal Justice
Response in Scotland
David Morran & Monica Wilson
In, Duff, A., Marshall, S., Dodash, R. E., and
Dobash, R. P. (Eds), Penal Theory and Practice: Tradition and
Innovation in Criminal Justice, Manchester: Manchester
University Press, pp 216 - 227.
Introduction
The CHANGE Project came into being in September 1989 with the
principal objective of establishing a criminal justice based
re-education programme for men who had been violent to their
wives or female partners. The Project aims to complement the
work of Women's Aid in combating domestic violence by
challenging men to take responsibility for and to end their
violence against women.
CHANGE is funded by the Urban Renewal Unit and sponsored by
Central Regional Council Social Work Department. The Project
comprises the practice element of a practice and research
exercise aimed at examining the effectiveness of particular
intervention strategies in dealing with male domestic violence.
The research element is separately constituted and jointly
funded by the Home and Scottish Offices (Dobash & Dobash, 1989).
This paper describes the origins and perspective of the CHANGE
Project and how it has gone about undertaking its task.
Origins of the CHANGE Project
Since the early 1970's women's movements in the UK and elsewhere
have campaigned for the recognition of the extent and impact of
the problem of domestic violence on women's lives and have
worked to provide safety and support for the victims of men's
violence. This has involved the provision of refuges for women
and their children, challenging institutional and community
tolerance of men's violence against women and campaigning for
social change and legal reform (Dobash & Dobash, 1992; Schechter,
1982).
Research into the nature and extent of this problem has
established that women are predominantly the victims and men
predominantly the perpetrators of what is alternatively called
wife abuse, woman abuse or domestic violence (Dobash & Dobash,
1979; Levinson, 1989; Saunders, 1988; Smith, 1989). The burden
of dealing with the outcomes of men's violence has fallen almost
entirely on women, forcing them to be the ones to leave their
homes and, through organisations such as Women's Aid, to take on
the state and its agencies to establish the legitimacy of the
problem and develop effective responses to it.
Research also indicates that while campaigns for changes in
practice by statutory agencies and for legislative reform have
resulted in some real benefits for abused women, little has been
done to confront men's violence directly or to deal with their
responsibility for it. Social work and medical agencies for
example often tended to deal with abused women by redefining the
abuse as symptomatic of other underlying welfare or medical
problems. Responses such as these effectively ignored or
minimised the issue of violence and men's responsibility for it,
thus reducing the likelihood of women seeking further assistance
(Johnson, 1985b; Kurz & Stark, 1988; Pahl, 1985).
The criminal nature of men's violence to their partners has
often been underplayed by criminal justice agencies; the police,
prosecutors and sentencers. For their part, the police have
traditionally treated domestic violence as primarily a private
affair between a man and his wife and marginal to the real task
of policing (Faragher, 1985). Smith (1989) cites several
examples of unsatisfactory practices by police in dealing with
domestic violence. Despite considerable time spent responding to
domestic incidents and assaults, record keeping has often been
poor or non-existent. Police have been seen to be slow to
respond to domestic incidents, and reluctant to arrest men who
have assaulted their partners, often against the stated request
of the woman to do so.
Police have been reported as unsympathetic to battered women,
often viewing them as unreliable and likely to withdraw their
complaint. However several studies point to a considerable
variation in the extent to which women actually do withdraw
complaints, and Wasoff (1982) found that women's reputation for
being reluctant to have partners charged is not borne out.
Pioneering U.S. practitioners in this field, such as Pence and
Paymar (1990), have argued that women will be less likely to ask
for charges to be dropped where they receive both practical
support and a sympathetic criminal justice response.
The last few years have seen moves to demonstrate that the
police are responding to this criticism and have taken steps to
treat the problem more seriously. More emphasis is now given to
the police response in training, with organisations such as
Women's Aid contributing to courses. In 1985 the the London
Metropolitan Police Force's Working Party into Domestic Violence
acknowledged that violence against women in the home was a
'significant problem', but concluded that their response had
often been inappropriate and unhelpful. The lack of training was
highlighted as was the fact that current terminology 'domestic
dispute ' helps to trivialise wife abuse rather than treating it
as an allegation of crime (Dobash & Dobash, 1992). In a further
move in 1990 to improve the police response to domestic
violence, the Home and Scottish Offices issued circulars to
Chief Constables highlighting the need to treat domestic
assaults as seriously as all other forms of assault (Police (CC)
Circular No 3/1990).
Despite these changes, some officers still feel that their
efforts are often frustrated by women's reluctance to testify
against their partners. Intervention may be geared more to the
chances of a successful legal action than to the behaviour of
the perpetrator or the needs of the victim; the decision to
charge resting on the officer's evaluation of the likelihood of
the woman to follow through on the charge (Dobash & Dobash,
1992). For their part, women are often reluctant to call on the
police believing they will not take the violence seriously.
Women also have good reason to be mistrustful of the way their
position has been perceived and responded to by prosecutors and
sentencers within the courts. Domestic violence was long
perceived as a private matter or as an issue for the civil
rather than the criminal courts. Difficulties in proving and
processing domestic violence cases, the vulnerability of the
woman victim and the fact that she has often been perceived
unfairly as an 'unreliable witness' have perpetuated
intransigence within the courts (Moody & Tombs, 1982).
Courts may also have felt frustrated by the limited and
ineffective options at their disposal in dealing with the small
proportion of men whose violent offences actually came before
them. Admonishment is likely to leave the man feeling justified
in his use of violence and the woman feeling more vulnerable. It
also fails to provide the wider community with a clear indicator
that all forms of violence, including that directed at women in
the home, are unacceptable and will not be ignored by agencies
of the state. While a fine may provide the symbolic statement of
rejecting violence, providing its size is not so small as to
counteract the message, it also has the effect of fining the
whole family. Imprisonment might provide temporary protection
for the woman and register society's disapproval, but it does
little to change the man himself who, in due course, will return
to the community and in most cases to the woman who has been
abused.
The message given by the criminal justice system to women, men
and the community is a vital part of the response to male
violence and may either serve to reinforce the idea that wife
abuse is a private matter or that violence against any member of
the community is an offence deserving an effective response from
the justice system in co-ordination with other agencies of the
state and the community.
Perspectives on Domestic Violence
Initial theories to gain currency following the exposure of the
problem explained domestic violence as stemming from the
pathologies of either the men or women concerned (cf. Smith,
1989; Stordeur & Stille, 1989). Men who used violence were
described as neurotic, mentally ill or disturbed; female victims
were similarly labelled, implying that they invited the violence
upon themselves. Current evidence about the extent of domestic
violence has highlighted the problem of pathological
explanations. They seek to propose an ‘exceptionalistic
explanation to a universalistic problem’ (Freeman, 1979).
Although they may apply to a few cases, they do not provide a
broad theory of the general phenomenon (Smith, 1989).
Also implicit in these pathological explanations is the notion
that solutions lie in treating 'sick' individuals rather than
addressing the need for wider social or institutional changes.
Such explanations are politically attractive as they marginalise
the problem as belonging to a few deviant individuals rather
than stemming from social structural factors.
Other perspectives did however explain male violence as a
response to social structural factors resulting in frustration
and stress. As pathological explanations blamed individual
abusers and victims; so these approaches indicted society. They
failed however to explain why violence to women is seen as the
appropriate response to these tensions. They tended also to
imply erroneously that wife abuse was confined to those groups
or strata of society who may be under particular stresses
(Adams, 1988; Bograd, 1988; Smith, 1989; Stordeur & Stille,
1989).
Another model widely employed to explain domestic violence is
the interactionist perspective, stemming from family systems
theory. Here violence is seen as one extreme of a variety of
coercive and incitement tactics used in dysfunctional
relationships (Adams, 1988; Stordeur & Stille, 1989). This model
ignores the importance of the power differential in
relationships and thus views women as equal contributors to
their victimisation. By concentrating on the 'violent couple'
and looking at what provokes the violent response,
responsibility for causing or provoking violence is attributed
as much to the victim as to the perpetrator (Eisikovits &
Edleson, 1989).
A pro-feminist perspective sees men's abuse of and violence
towards women as intentional behaviour (Dobash & Dobash, 1992;
Yllo & Bograd, 1988). By placing domestic violence in its
historical and cultural context, a pro-feminist perspective
offers a broad theory of the problem which can account for the
question 'Why do men beat their wives/partners?' (Bograd, 1988).
Such a perspective views domestic violence as stemming from an
historical legacy of men’s power over women. The development of
western civilisation in the Judeao-Christian tradition defined
woman's status as separate from and inferior to man. Women
rarely had any identity outside the family. They were defined by
their relationships to men or children: wife, daughter, mother.
The seeds of wife beating lie in the subordination of women to
male authority and control. This subordination was
institutionalised in the structure of the patriarchal family and
supported by economic and political institutions, and by a
belief system which made women's subordination seem natural,
morally just and sacred (Dobash & Dobash, 1979).
This historical legacy is at the root of the problem we still
face today. There is still currency in the notion that a man's
home is his castle, that a woman's place is at home and that
what goes on in the home is essentially private even if it does
contravene the law. The very rituals which we use to change
single women into wives with their emphasis on unviolated
property (the white wedding), on her adopting his name and in
the traditional wording of the wedding ceremony: 'love, honour
and obey', signify the inequity of the partners. From such a
perspective the nature of male violence in the home is directed
at establishing and maintaining the dominance of the man over
his female partner and may extend beyond the use of physical
violence to encompass other behaviour aimed at imposing his will
on her.
A pro-feminist perspective has informed the approaches of many
of the intervention programmes which CHANGE has drawn upon (Edleson,
Miller & Stone, 1985; Pence & Paymar, 1985; Sinclair, 1989).
Adopting a pro-feminist perspective requires that an
intervention strategy for solving the problem of domestic
violence should involve all those organisations and individuals
concerned. Effective intervention needs to tackle both
individual offenders, the way domestic violence is treated by
the institutions of the criminal justice system: the police,
courts and social work; and to challenge community tolerance for
domestic violence by questioning social attitudes to the
problem. At the same time it is crucial that refuge and support
services for women are maintained and that women are consulted
by organisations undertaking intervention work with men. In
order to highlight the criminal and unacceptable nature of men's
violence to women, a pro-feminist perspective would also suggest
that any programme aimed at changing men's violence should
operate as a sanction of the justice system.
The CHANGE Men's Programme
The CHANGE Men's Programme was set up to work with abusers who
have been processed through the justice system. Men are referred
to the programme by the courts and attend as an additional
requirement of a probation order. By working with the police,
courts, social work and voluntary agencies CHANGE aims to
encourage collaborative inter-agency responses which acknowledge
the criminal nature of violence against women in the home. Both
the operation of the men's programme and training of other
professionals are oriented to influencing practice so that wife
abuse is no longer treated as trivial or a private matter, but
as serious and of public concern. In this way CHANGE hopes to
play its part in changing general cultural norms and values
which have long condoned domestic violence.
Referrals to the Programme
Through negotiations with courts and social work in Central
Region an agreed process by which men are referred to the
programme has been established. Where men appear before courts
and have pled or been found guilty on a charge where domestic
violence has been identified, Sheriffs may call for CHANGE to
assess a man's suitability for the programme.
CHANGE therefore conducts an assessment interview which is
concerned with a number of areas: the type of violence the man
has used to his partner; the history, frequency and severity of
that violence; whether and to what extent he takes
responsibility for his violence and his motivation to stop it;
and the safety of the woman involved. As admission to CHANGE is
as a condition of a probation order the man remains in the
community. It is therefore necessary to ensure as far as
possible that this does not endanger his partner.
It is recognised that at the time of interview a man will have
his own reasons for wanting to come on to the programme. He may
be remorseful, anxious to stay out of prison, to stop his
partner from leaving him or to get his partner back if she has
already left. He is advised however that acceptance onto the
programme offers no such guarantees and that his partner will be
contacted to be given details of the programme. The woman
concerned is also contacted at this stage to ascertain her
safety needs, discuss her willingness to talk to CHANGE about
the past violence and to offer the advice and support of Women's
Aid. She in turn is advised that the sanction on her partner
places no obligations on her and that her safety and wishes are
paramount.
Where men are recommended for the programme they must agree to a
contract which is a specific requirement of the probation order.
The man is made aware of its terms during the assessment and
once the probation order has been made the document is signed by
the man, in the presence of CHANGE and his social worker. Men
are also aware that non-compliance with the terms of their
contract will be reported to the social work department who in
turn may refer them back to the court.
During the time that a man is on the programme, CHANGE liaises
with the social worker holding the probation order, submitting
written reports at the midway and completion stages, and
attending probation reviews to discuss men's progress. Written
completion reports are also submitted to courts. Partners of men
on the programme are consulted where they consent to this. Where
women do not wish this contact with the programme, they are
still given information about the work undertaken with the man
and are informed if he fails to comply with the programme
requirements.
Programme Structure
CHANGE has drawn on the experiences of programmes already in
operation in North America (Edleson, Miller & Stone, 1985; Pence
& Paymar, 1985; Sinclair, 1989) and has been able to tailor the
programme content and style to early findings about their
effectiveness (Dobash & Dobash, 1992; Edleson & Syers, 1989;
Eisikovits & Edleson 1989; Pence & Shepard, 1988). While it is
still too early for such research to be conclusive it has
nonetheless been helpful in shaping the CHANGE men's programme
as well as many of its specific components. In particular,
Edleson & Syers' research (1989) which compared a number of
different group-based programmes found that comparatively short,
structured, educational programmes appear to have the most
impact on ending men's physical violence and other abuse.
The CHANGE men's programme has therefore been designed as a
short, structured group-based re-education programme working
with cohorts of four to six men at any one time. The
sixteen-week curriculum comprises two-hour weekly sessions which
are held in local community premises on weekday evenings. Men
understand that they may be required to attend for longer than
sixteen weeks and that upon completion they have still only
undergone a basic programme which has introduced them to some of
the ideas and skills they need in order to understand why they
use violence and how they can stop. One of the advantages of
working with men who are on probation is that they can continue
the work begun in the programme in the context of the individual
contact they have with their social worker. CHANGE influences
this work through regular reports and liaison meetings with
social workers during which specific difficulties and
outstanding issues for men can be discussed.
Programme Content
The programme encourages men to take personal responsibility for
their violent behaviour by increasing their awareness of the
dynamics involved in its use; by challenging their attitudes and
beliefs around both the use of violence and relationships
between men and women; and by developing skills for relating
non-violently to others. The methods employed include
brainstorming, written work - including weekly homework- small
group work, didactics, video, self-reporting, self-assessment
and role play.
The programme begins by extending men's definition of what
constitutes violent and abusive behaviour. Violence is defined
as a range of physical, sexual and psychological actions the
purpose of which is getting and keeping control over others.
Usually men will either deny their violence or try to blame it
on someone or something else such as alcohol or a sudden loss of
control, such as a 'blind rage'. Sometimes they seem frightened
and confused by the apparent mystery of this behaviour and want
to understand it for themselves. Men are therefore encouraged to
examine in what circumstances and why they have used violence,
and over the course of several weeks various incidents are
broken down where men have been violent and abusive including
those which resulted in them being charged. Men may thus come to
see that in these situations their violence had the purpose of
maintaining or re-establishing authority on that particular
occasion or of getting him something he wanted, be it 'peace and
quiet', his evening meal, obedience or sex.
Men often seek to excuse their unacceptable behaviour by blaming
it on the woman involved. She is often portrayed as being
culpable in some way or having provoked a justifiable
retaliation on the man's part. While these are recognised by the
programme as mere excuses, the fact that some men may live in
relationships where there is conflict is nevertheless
acknowledged. It is suggested to men however that no matter the
quality of their relationship with their partner, the use of
violence is solely their responsibility and that failure to
accept this will inevitably nullify their promises to stop.
Quite simply, they cannot refrain from behaviour which they do
not accept as their own. Only by recognising and accepting that
violence has been their choice can men refrain from behaving
this way in the future. Men must learn to deal with conflict
without resorting to violence. They also need to examine the
ideas and prejudices which 'justify' their behaviour and defines
it either as acceptable or 'only natural' thereby condoning its
recurrence.
Men are encouraged to consider the consequences of their
violence and the gains and losses it entails. The 'gains' which
are short term relate to the restoration of supremacy in the
relationship or services rendered. The 'losses' however are
incurred at the expense of the 'gains' and are more long term.
According to most men these include the loss of love, trust and
respect from the woman and children alike. Usually men have not
considered the effects of their behaviour, either through
attributing blame to the woman and thus seeking justification,
through 'forgetting' about the incident in order to cope with
guilt or through straightforward lack of concern. The open
acknowledgement that their behaviour has physically and
otherwise damaged someone close to them often has a profound
effect upon them.
Some men may require to learn particular skills in order to
rehearse situations where in the past they have felt justified
in becoming aggressive or violent. Many men report for example
that they seem to have particular problems with anger or with
jealousy and look for techniques which can keep them calm and
rational. While the programme attempts to equip men with some of
these skills, it is important to do this in a way which takes
account of the context of their anger and jealousy, and
emphasises that these are bound up in their notions of
acceptable male and female behaviour.
Finally, in order to be accountable and effective, the programme
must remain fully aware of the dangers in this type of work with
men. Some men will continue to minimise their continuing abusive
behaviour, and indeed some may flagrantly lie, secure in the
knowledge that their partners will continue to protect them. The
programme thus carefully monitors the effect it appears to be
having on men's behaviour by confirming, if possible from
sources other than the man, that participation is having the
desired effect, and that where it clearly is not, appropriate
prompt action results.
Conclusion
The CHANGE Project was established in 1989 to set up a programme
for men who are violent to their wives or female partners.
Operating from a pro-feminist perspective, CHANGE sees men's
violence to their partners as intentional and as but one aspect
of a whole range of abusive behaviours which have the purpose of
establishing and maintaining male dominance over women. That
male dominance is rooted in history and culture and reflected in
the responses of criminal justice agencies and traditional
community tolerance of marital violence.
To be effective, CHANGE believes that intervention requires to
go beyond confronting individual violent men by locating that
work within the justice system so as to demonstrate to men, to
women and to the community at large that violence to any member
of that community is illegal and socially unacceptable.
References
Adams, D. (1988), 'Treatment models of men who batter: A
pro-feminist analysis', in Yllo, K., & Bograd, M. (eds),
Feminist Perspectives on Wife Abuse, Sage Publications, London,
pp. 176-199
Bograd, M. (1988), 'Introduction' in Yllo, K., & Bograd, M. (eds),
Feminist Perspectives on Wife Abuse, Sage Publications, London,
pp. 11-26
Dobash, R. E., & Dobash, R. P. (1979), Violence Against Wives,
The Free Press, New York
Dobash, R.E., & Dobash, R.P. (1989), An Analysis of Programmes
for Violent Men, A Research Proposal submitted to the Social
Work Services Group of the Scottish Office and the Home Offices.
Dobash, R.E., & Dobash, R.P. (1992), Women, Violence and Social
Change, Routledge, London
Edleson, J.L., Miller, D., & Stone, G.W. ( 1985), Counselling
Men Who Batter: Group Leader's Handbook, Men's Coalition Against
Battering, Inc., Albany
Edleson, J. L., & Syers, M. (1989), The Relative Effectiveness
of Group Treatments for Men Who Batter, Domestic Abuse Project,
Minneapolis
Eisikovits, Z.C., & Edleson, J.L. (1989), 'Intervening with Men
Who Batter: A Critical Review of the Literature', Social Service
Review 63:3 University of Chicago, pp. 384-414
Faragher, T. (1985), 'The police response to violence against
women in the home', in Pahl, Jan (ed), Private Violence - Public
Policy. The Needs of Battered Women and the Response of Public
Services, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London, pp. 110-124
Freeman, M.D.A. (1979) Violence in the Home, Saxon House,
Farnborough
Ganley, A. (1981) Court Mandated Counselling for Men Who Batter,
Centre for Women's Policy Studies, Washington , D.C.
Johnson, N. (ed) (1985a), Marital Violence, Sociological Review
Monograph 31, Routledge and Kegan Paul, London
Johnson, N. (1985b), 'Police, social work and medical responses
to battered women' in Johnson, N. (ed) Marital
Violence,Sociological Review Monograph 31, Routledge and Kegan
Paul, London, pp. 109-123
Kurz , D. & Stark, E. (1988), 'Not So Benign Neglect: The
Medical Responses to Battering', in Yllo, K., & Bograd, M. (eds),
Feminist Perspectives on Wife Abuse, Sage Publications, London,
pp. 249-266
Levinson, D. (1989) Family Violence in Cross-Cultural
Perspective, Sage Publications, London
Moody, S. R., & Tombs, J. (1982), Prosecutions in the Public
Interest, Scottish Academic Press, Edinburgh
Morgan, P.A. (1985), 'Constructing images of deviance: a look at
state intervention into the problem of wife battery', in
Johnson, N. (ed)
Marital Violence, Sociological Review Monograph 31,Routledge and
Kegan Paul, London, pp. 60-76
Pahl, Jan (ed), (1985), Private Violence - Public Policy. The
Needs of Battered Women and the Response of Public Services,
Routledge and Kegan Paul, London
Pence, E., & Paymar, M. (1990), Power and Control: Tactics of
Men Who Batter, Minnesota Program Development Inc., Duluth
Pence, E., & Shepard, M. (1988), 'Integrating Feminist Theory
and Practice: The Challenge of the Battered Women's Movement',
in Yllo, K., & Bograd, M. (eds), Feminist Perspectives on Wife
Abuse, Sage Publications, London, pp. 282 - 298
Pirog-Good, M., & Stets-Kealy, J. (1985), 'Male batterers and
battering prevention programs: A national survey', Response
VIII, pp. 8-12
Police (CC) Circular No 3/1990, (1990) Investigation of
Complaints of Domestic Assault, Scottish Home and Health
Department, Edinburgh
Saunders, D. G. (1988), 'Wife Abuse, Husband Abuse or Mutual
Combat ? A Feminist Perspective on the Empirical Findings', in
Yllo, K., & Bograd, M. (eds), Feminist Perspectives on Wife
Abuse, Sage Publications, London, pp. 90-11
Schechter, S. (1982), Women and Male Violence - The Visions and
Struggles of the Battered Women's Movement, Pluto Press, London
Sinclair, H. ( 1989), Manalive: An Accountable Advocacy Batterer
Intervention Program, Marin Abused Women's Services, Marin
County, CA.
Smith, L. (1989), Domestic Violence: An Overview of the
Literature H.M.S.O., London
Sonkin, D. J., & Durphy, M. (1989), Learning to live without
Violence ,Volcano Press, Volcano
Stordeur, R. A., & Stille, R. (1989), Ending Men’s Violence
Against Their Partners: One Road to Peace, Sage Publications,
London
Wasoff, F. (1982), 'Legal Protection from Wifebeating: The
Process of Domestic Assaults by Scottish Prosecutors and
Criminal Courts', International Journal of the Sociology of Law,
10:2, pp. 197-204
Yllo, K., & Bograd, M. (eds), (1988), Feminist Perspectives on
Wife Abuse,
Sage Publications, London
