CHANGE
STOPPING MEN'S VIOLENCE
CONFERENCE
A CHANGE IN PRACTICE
January 1990
University of Stirling
CHANGE
Men learning to end their
violence against women
As all of you will have seen
from your programmes, this is the CHANGE strap line. We believe
it makes a number of statements about CHANGE's philosophy and
approach: for instance that the focus of CHANGE is on ending
violence against women: that men must take on the responsibility
of ending their violence themselves. Finally, our name
emphasises CHANGE: we are about change, social change. Not
individual solutions to the problems of individuals, but about
changes in the way that our society perceives and responds to
violence against women. Change involving major social
institutions: the police, the courts and social work.
We are aware that there are a
number of other programmes for violent men currently in
existence, or being planned, elsewhere in the UK, and that some
representatives from them are here today. We hope to be able to
work with these groups, learn from them, and share our
experiences with them.
CHANGE has three main
objectives:
1.
To reduce violence by using a unique method for dealing
with violent men in the community.
2.
To aid social work and the criminal justice system in
reducing their cases in this area
3.
To develop training programmes and educational materials
to be used by social, legal and voluntary community agencies.
The project will also
incorporate methods of systematic monitoring and evaluation.
To achieve these objectives
CHANGE is liaising with the agencies involved: the police, court
officials, social work and women's aid to implement an
alternative sanction for men who have been arrested and,
probably, convicted of assaulting their partners. They will be
assessed, and if considered suitable, referred to the CHANGE
programme, most likely as part of a probation order. The
programme will consist of community based group work for men,
with the emphasis on education.
What I am going to do with my
time this morning is first, to introduce you to CHANGE. Then I
want to consider in some detail its philosophy. Finally, I want
to tell you how CHANGE will be accountable to the community and
how it will be evaluated. So, introducing CHANGE:-
CHANGE as an organisation was
formed in 1985 by a representatives of various agencies
concerned with ending the abuse of women. It was seen as an
extension to the growing understanding of the problem of abused
women and to the wide-ranging work already being undertaken by
the Women's Aid movement. Their efforts since the early 1970s in
establishing refuges, bringing about changes in legislation and
in social and legal practice, and their work in public education
and training have done much to challenge traditional public and
agency understanding of the problem of battered women.
However, thus far research has
indicated that these steps, while widening the options open to
abused women have done little to end men's violence. CHANGE
represents an attempt to challenge men's violence and to put the
responsibility for it where it belongs: with those men.
The first principle of CHANGE
is stopping the violence. Research shows that existing agency
responses have their limitations. Criminal justice initiatives
such as diversion and reparation have proved to have some
limited success, but not in cases of violence against partners.
Research undertaken in North America confirms this poor success
rate. A major difficulty with diversion schemes is that they
have the effect of reducing the seriousness of the offence by
demonstrating to the offender, his partner, the community and
those in the justice system that violence against women is not a
serious offence worthy of sanction.
There is however, evidence
from North America to show that the use of arrest may reduce
violence, and lead to positive results for abused women in terms
of a reduction in subsequent violence, greater satisfaction with
police response and an improvement in their daily lives. In
contrast to criminal justice responses, family therapy and
counselling is often proposed as a solution. This approach we
feel, fails to deal adequately with the issue of male violence,
seeing it as only part of the problem, and often concentrating
on appeasement techniques whereby women alter their behaviour in
order to prevent violence.
Such an approach fails to
recognise the power basis of relationships, assuming equal
responsibility on both partners for resolving the situation.
This has the effect of minimising both the violence and the
man's responsibility for it.
In looking for an effective
model for its approach CHANGE has been able to draw on the many
years experiences of North American programmes. The lesson here
seems to be that what is needed is a multi agency community
based education programme that goes beyond existing criminal
justice and social services responses.
During our research into North
American programmes, certain key features have emerged as being
important in whether such programmes are effective.
1. Underlying philosophy
Successful programmes seem to
be those which start from the assumption that men's violence
towards their female partners stems from the fundamental
inequality in male/female relationships which has its roots in
patriarchy. Traditionally men have been accorded the right to
exercise power and control over women and children, both in
general terms and in specific relationships. That exercise of
power and control encompasses a wide range of individual
behaviour and social norms. Examples include the control of
women's freedom of action through fear of rape or violent
attack: women are expected to conform to certain norms such as
not dressing provocatively and not going out alone on the
streets at night. Women are expected to seek protection from
other men though a stable relationship with one man. Within this
one-to-one relationship, the man has certain rights of
exercising control over her behaviour, rights which have had the
backing of the law. This is quite ironic in view of the fact
that research has shown that the person most likely to be
violent to a woman is her male partner. Similarly, children are
expected to be safest from the 'bad' world in the context of the
loving, stable family. Emerging evidence about the incidence of
child sexual and physical abuse within the family should make us
question such assumptions.
The exercise of male power and
control can take many forms of which violence is at one
extreme. CHANGE endorses the view that solutions to the problems
of family violence therefore lie ultimately with changing this
inequality through changing social attitudes and institutional
responses to all manifestations of male power. Within this
context, programmes for violent men are viewed as only a
beginning of a wider effort for change.
2. Organisational
characteristics of programmes
Although evaluation of
different approaches is fairly patchy as yet, research indicates
that, in North America, programmes involving couples and
couples’ group work have not yet been proven effective, those
involving changes in the criminal justice system alone, such as
increasing use of arrest have had limited success, while group
work with men, especially if it involves an educational as
opposed to a treatment approach appears to show promise.
In a recent study of short
versus longer sessions, and educational versus unstructured
process groups, initial results favour short educational
sessions as measured in terms of participants remaining
violence-free 6 months after completing the programme. Another
study concentrating on group programmes for men, also in North
America, informs us that programmes with the highest completion
rates are those which are short and court mandated or referred.
The CHANGE programme will
therefore consist of group work, be relatively short in
duration, probably 12 weeks: for men only, involving the
sanction of the criminal justice system and with a strong
educational element.
3. Method and content of
programme
Although we have as yet had
limited access to the details of programme content, popular
approaches seem to include the use of the following:
1. formal contracts or
agreements, such as admission of violence, promising to remain
violence free during the programme, and undertaking to get
assistance with other problems such as alcohol or drug abuse:
2. Education sessions in which
the origins of men's power and how this relates to the use of
violence are explained
3. Re-enactment of violent
events in order to break them down into their various stages.
This can take the form of dramatic role-playing sessions or the
use of video vignettes which form the basis of discussion.
4. Disclosure sessions in
which participants relate their experiences of being violent and
try to analyse them within the group.
5. The keeping of anger logs
or diaries in a fairly structured form, in order to help
participants to understand their own anger and develop different
responses to it. These responses often take the form initially
of 'time-outs' when participants are encouraged to leave the
scene if they feel a violent event to be imminent. During
'time-outs' participants are advised to call a hotline or do
something physical, such as strenuous exercise. Some programmes
assign forms of homework which participants must fulfil.
CHANGE will incorporate these
five features, and we are currently engaged in adapting them to
the Scottish context.
Some programmes operate a
closed intake, only accepting new applicants at the start of the
programme, but participants can return all over again if
necessary. Others are rolling, taking on new clients at any
time, the new ones expected to learn from and use existing
clients as role models.
A central theme of many
programmes is the building of alternative male peer groups for
participants. Since the right of male dominance and control are
so deeply entrenched in our society, traditional male groups
will usually offer sympathy and support for the man's violence,
going along with his denial, minimalising and justifying his
violence. Participants are encouraged to make contact with men
who deny this right and to become advocates in the community for
such a stand. CHANGE will encourage the development of links
among both programme participants and other community groups who
share the same outlook, such as the network of men's groups now
developing in Scotland.
Motivation for men to come
onto programmes may initially be court or self referral, but of
the latter, the majority are socially mandated in the sense that
they perceive it to be the only way to save the relationship. In
both cases, the motivation is fear of sanction which must be
changed to internal motivation if the man is to remain violence
free after leaving. At CHANGE, we believe it is important fairly
early on therefore to convince men that their violence may be a
useful and effective method of getting their own way in the
short term, but that in the long term it has damaging
consequences for them. It damages them as whole individuals: it
damages their relationships with women, and serves to isolate
them and their families from the community.
The gender of group leaders in
North American programmes varies. Some groups maintain that only
men should be involved since they are the sex responsible for
the battering and that the presence of a woman could reinforce
the men's dependence on women to fulfil the nurturing supportive
role. Others maintain that joint male/female group leaders are
desirable since a woman would act to police the agenda, prevent
male bonding and the relationship she has with her co-leader act
as an example of egalitarian working. CHANGE will adopt this
approach.
Another feature of some
programmes is the use of a hot-line: a telephone emergency
number staffed by trained volunteers, often ex-clients, which
can be contacted by both clients and other men in the community
seeking help. We hope to be able to offer this facility in the
longer term.
Participants' progress is
measured in a variety of ways: attendance records, self
monitoring and partner monitoring. Partner monitoring is
probably the most difficult since achieving the balance between
discovering from the man's partner if he is telling the truth
about his progress could easily be turned into yet another way
for him to control her: threatening her if she does not give the
responses he wishes.
One way round this is the
granting of confidentiality to the woman but not the man, in
which anything he says can be reported to her, but her
information is not reported to him, only used as a guide for
group leaders. Of course, all women should have the first option
of being able to leave the man either until they feel safe to
return or permanently, or for him to have to leave her. We are
currently working on how best to assess progress while not
jeopardising women's safety.
4. Relationship to the
Battered Women's Movement.
Programmes in North America
link with the battered women's movement in two main ways. First
creating a programme directly subsumed within the battered
women's movement, such as Duluth, Minneapolis-St Paul, and Marin
County, California. The second model is of a distinct
organisation linked through informal contact and through a
shared philosophy and approach, such as EMERGE in Boston and
RAVEN in St Louis.
The link is seen to be of
paramount importance to keep women informed of the realities of
such programmes. Otherwise such programmes could give abused
women false hope about the possibilities of reforming violent
men and jeopardise women's safety. CHANGE falls somewhere
between these two models and is linked to the work of Women's
Aid by their representation on the management committee and by a
general commitment to support services to abused women.
A major tenet arising from
this relationship is that men's programmes should not compete
for funds with women's shelters. This is so since the advent of
programmes could be seen to be the solution to the problem and
as replacing the need for refuges and support services to abused
women: something which is a long way from being the case. CHANGE
has built into its funding an element which will go to the local
women's aid groups with whom we are liaising in recognition of
the work they will be doing alongside us.
5. Relationship to the wider
community
Since programmes which adopt a
pro-feminist analysis in understanding family violence view the
role of the men's programme as only a beginning, work in the
community is seen as a vital component of their task. This work
takes a wide variety of forms, from training of personnel in
statutory and voluntary organisations and among professional
groups, to work in schools and community groups. This work may
be undertaken by programme personnel, past clients and often in
conjunction with women's shelters. CHANGE is also committed to a
wider educational and training programme aimed at the community
and statutory agencies, and we will be developing materials for
this.
Finally I want to deal with
the issue of accountability to the community. This relates to
both developing the programme and evaluating its effectiveness.
In developing the programme, CHANGE has drawn on a the wide
range of expertise from the various agencies who will be
involved but particularly that of Women's Aid: both in general
terms of their understanding of the problem of male violence and
more specifically, in how such a programme will effect women who
are abused.
We have spent some time
already, and intend to spend more, talking to women who are in,
or who have been through the local refuges in order to get their
opinion of how such a programme could or should function, and to
discover what support systems should be available to women
whose partners are involved. We also intend to spend some time
in refuges elsewhere in Scotland, especially those whose intake
includes women from ethnic minority groups, in order that the
programme meets the needs of all women in the community.
Women's needs will depend on
whether she chooses to remain in the home with her partner,
remain and have him excluded, or leave: either to a refuge or
elsewhere. On the whole, the women we have spoken to so far have
welcomed the advent of CHANGE. Several wished it had been an
option open to them in the past. In discussing how best to
ensure women's safety it is difficult for many of us here to
imagine just how isolated many women in violent relationships
find themselves. We have been told, and we know from research,
that some women's freedom of action is very severely curtailed:
their access to the outside world is strictly controlled: trips
to the shops are timed and access to relatives limited.
One woman told us that her
husband even controlled her use of the phone by requesting that
Telecom give them detailed bills, even though this service is
charged for, to stop her phoning for help and advice. The
picture that is emerging is that we will require to network with
a variety of agencies, the social services, health services and
Women's Aid to provide women with the support they will need.
CHANGE is also committed to
evaluation on three levels
1. The impact of the programme
on participants:
2. Assessing the progress of
group sessions and
3. Determining the impact of
the programme on the community and local agencies.
For these exercises,
researchers will be employed, for whom we are currently seeking
funding. The research will be conducted separately from the
programme and it is hoped that some comparative element be built
in. We wish, for example to compare the impact of CHANGE with
doing nothing, with criminal justice initiatives alone, and
with other programmes such as that currently being devised by
Lothian Regional Council Social Work Department.
References
Pirog-Good, Maureen A and Jan
Stets 'Programmes for Abusers: Who drops out and what can be
done?' Response Vol. 9 No2 17 - 19
