CHANGE 1990-1991 Annual Report FOREWORD The issue of domestic violence is, like many others, one in respect of which social workers can do with all the help available. Innovative programmes based upon sound research findings are more certain than others to attract the support of funding agencies and CHANGE readily met the criteria when the approach was first made to Central Regional Council for Urban Renewal Unit application. One year into the project, good working relationships have been developed and social workers have welcomed the opportunity to recommend referral to the CHANGE men’s programme of men charged with violence against their partners. It has also become evident that courts in the Region have welcomed the programme as a credible component in a developing range of options for addressing the issue. Confronting men who perpetrate violence against women with their unacceptable behaviour may also be viewed as enhancing support to victims. With the advent of 100% funding of Social Work Services in the Criminal Justice System it seems reasonable to hope that the project may be able to consolidate and indeed develop its work in future. Although the road ahead is paved with testing questions there is confidence that the capacity of the Management Committee and staff to monitor, review and adapt will ensure a continuing important role for the programme. Ian Ross Director of Social Work   STATEMENT FROM THE CHIEF CONSTABLE As newly appointed Chief Constable of Central Scotland Police I was pleased to learn of the innovative, forward thinking work being carried out by the CHANGE Project. Police officers all too often are the front line workers in dealing with domestic violence and it is refreshing for me to know as Chief Constable that such issues are being tackled in a credible, professional manner, providing a possible cure as opposed to simply treating the symptoms. Like the courts, I have no hesitation in endorsing the project and look forward to monitoring its results in the coming year. William Wilson Chief Constable   CENTRAL REGION WOMEN’S AID AND CHANGE Central Region Women’s Aid has had a long relationship with the CHANGE Project which dates back to the early days of the steering group which was instrumental in securing funding for the project. It was therefore with a sense of achievement, though also some apprehension that we heard of the success of the application to Urban Aid. We have continued to be involved with the CHANGE Project throughout the first year of operation. This involvement has been in two distinct areas. Firstly, each group is represented on the Management Committee, which sets the policy objectives for the project and has, during this year, appointed the first staff members and seen the programme up and running. Secondly, now that men are being referred onto the programme, we have started to undertake our other role - namely the support of their female partners. In the initial stages numbers have been small but as expected there has already been a steady rise. This work involves not only direct contact with those women who request it but also close liaison with the co-ordinators who ensure that the partners of all men on the programme are given information on the services provided by Women’s Aid and our contact numbers. Women’s Aid Groups in Central Region receive a small grant from the CHANGE funding which in some measure compensates for the increased workload. As this money became available before the programme commenced we used the first instalment to commission and produce an exhibition, which illustrates our services, for each group. This has proved very useful and has been on display throughout the Region in libraries, health centres, etc. As CHANGE is still in its early stages, it is too soon to come to any conclusion about the success of the programme in respect of long-term benefits for female partners. However, we remain committed to the principles and philosophy of the CHANGE Project and support its efforts to explore alternative approaches to tackling the problem of men abusing their female partners, which may eventually offer women a better remedy than having to leave home, family and all that is familiar.  CONVENOR’S REPORT On behalf of the Management Committee I am very pleased to introduce the CHANGE Project’s first Annual Report. In late 1985 a group came together in order to extend existing efforts to deal with violence against women in the home. That group included people working in the voluntary and statutory sectors, with particularly important representation from Women’s Aid. Other members included social workers, solicitors, academics and a sheriff. The expressed purpose of the group was to develop a new, positive response to men who use violence against their partners. Modelling plans on the work of projects in the United States, they sought to encourage a multi-agency, criminal justice based response to domestic violence whereby offenders would be referred through the courts to a re-educational programme. An important concern of the group was the location of the project. A number of locations was considered, for example, Tayside and Strathclyde, but it was eventually decided to locate the project in Central Region as it was considered a more manageable location for a demonstration project. The group sought funds unsuccessfully through various initiatives operated by the Social Work Services Group of the Scottish Office. Discussions began with Central Region Social Work Department and in 1988, under their auspices; a successful application was made to Urban Aid. The CHANGE Project came into being on 1 September 1989. The Project reflected the initial concerns and interests of the original group with a clear commitment to operating a multi-agency programme linked to a criminal justice sanction. From the appointment of the project’s co-ordinators and administrator, the original group took on the role of a management committee. The varied backgrounds and diverse skills and interests of committee members have greatly informed the work of CHANGE. The CHANGE Project has a remit to challenge social attitudes and institutional responses to domestic violence and from the outset the workers began to negotiate and establish links with statutory agencies such as police, sheriffs, procurators fiscal and social work. The Project has attracted considerable interest from the media and various national and international organisations and this interest has been channelled into two highly successful conferences held in January and September 1990. The Management Committee has recently established an Advisory Group of interested individuals whose work brings them into contact with domestic violence. It is anticipated that this group will be of value in offering skilled advice and information to CHANGE and will also enable relevant agencies to learn about the progress of the CHANGE Project. In conclusion, the Management Committee would like to thank Dorothy Anderson (Administrator) and David Morran and Monica Wilson (Joint Co-ordinators) whose hard work and professionalism have established and consolidated the credibility of CHANGE thus far and we look forward to the success and continuing development of the project. Sue McLaughlin Convenor CHANGE Project   THE CHANGE PROJECT Developing the men’s programme Our major task during the first year was the development of the men’s programme. While the content of the programme was our main concern, we describe below how the need to satisfy the requirements of courts and ensure that the men actually accomplish the work affected the shape the programme has taken. The programme as a criminal justice resource A central feature of the men’s programme is that it works with men whose violence has brought them before the courts. This accords with CHANGE's position that domestic violence should be regarded as seriously as non-domestic violence by police and courts, and that men admitted to the programme are there as a sentence or requirement of the court. This also assists courts who have long expressed frustration in dealing with men who appear before them. Fining men very often fines the household and periods of imprisonment, while offering some short term protection for women, do little or nothing to confront men directly with their violent behaviour. If the criminal justice system is to use the men’s programme as a resource it must have confidence that CHANGE recognises the need to be accountable for its role as a sentencing option. The programme was designed to operate as a condition of a probation order. The programme requirements and rules are clear. Breaking or failing to comply with these can be dealt with by CHANGE and reported to the the social worker involved. The final sanction remains with courts. Research into American men’s programmes undertaken by Jeff Edelson of DAP in Minneapolis shows that comparatively short, structured programmes appear to have at least as much impact on ending men's physical violence as longer, open ended unstructured programmes which function for a year or more. We knew that in working with men to gain their compliance and co-operation, there were dangers in running over a period of time where men would eventually trip over issues such as continual attendance. As a result we might find ourselves in a constant struggle with them rather than providing them with an environment in which to learn. We also had to consider what we were able to commit ourselves to as individuals and workers in terms of running and reviewing the weekly programme. Acknowledging all of these factors we then worked towards developing a group format to run over a sixteen week period. The groups would meet locally once a week during the evening in community or school premises. Men would be required to attend at least sixteen sessions on a regular basis in order to fulfil their probation requirement. During a man’s time on the programme we would liaise regularly with the social worker / probation officer to comment on progress made or problems raised. Upon completion of the programme a man would continue to see his social worker on an individual basis.   Programme structure We next turned our attention to the structure of the programme. We were aware that in running a court-mandated programme a percentage of the men referred, despite the fact that they had agreed to participate, would nevertheless be resistant to the ideas and demands the programme made of them. We attempted to organise each session in such a way as to decrease men's overt resistance, draw them into undertaking the work of the group, and gain their compliance and co-operation. We wanted men to undertake work on particular attitudes and behaviour issues. The most efficient and accountable way to organise this work was in the form of modules. A man would have to attend as many sessions as were necessary to complete all the modules in order to fulfil his probation requirement with CHANGE. He would have to be present in the group for the didactic presentation of a module, i.e the ‘taught part’. He would have to contribute to any ‘brainstorming’ or other exercise which might follow, and he would also have to undertake homework which revealed his own use of violence as it related to the module concerned. During the programme each man would also have to undertake a session, nicknamed by them the ‘hot spot’, in which his own past and present use of violence was specifically examined. As there is an emphasis throughout the programme on the fact that violence is learned behaviour, the feel of the groups is more of work undertaken in a class than in a counselling session. Much of the interaction occurs as a result of prepared exercises and initially there is little scope within the group for open-ended discussion which all too quickly goes off the point. However, where men do become more open over time, discussion of their behaviour and sounding out of their concerns and ideas is not discouraged. The most essential aspect of the programme is its content. In discussing this however we should point out that the programme is not static and that structure and content are continuously reviewed and refined in the light of experience.   The content of the programme CHANGE contends that men commonly use violence in order to establish and maintain their power and control over women. As we began to develop the programme, however, we knew that we would have to do so in a way which took into account men's own beliefs, excuses and rationalisations as to why they were violent. While a man may state that his is an ‘anger problem’ CHANGE considers that his ‘anger problem’ is one which is invariably directed against his partner and may not constitute a problem in the way he relates to other people in his life. In order for learning to become meaningful to that man it is necessary to allow him to work through his own rationalisations, challenging them as we go, rather than merely dismissing them at the outset. When we first interview a man he has already been charged by the police. We have found a similarity in the way men describe their violence as having come to public attention. Typically the violence has occurred in the evening and usually after he has been drinking. He ascribes his violent outburst to the fact that he lost control because he was drunk. He sees his violence as being atypical - that is, totally out of character, sudden and physical, and due to factors for which he is not responsibile. He was "out of control" or in a "blind rage" at the time. We begin the process of demystifying the man's violence by challenging his attempts to deny and minimise his responsibility and blame someone or something else for his own behaviour. We know too that if he feels that his violence was atypical and less serious than that of other men in the room he will continue to resist accepting that his physical violence fits in with a wider pattern of behaviour. From the start therefore we confront his ideas of what constitutes violence. CHANGE defines violence as ‘behaviour or actions which intimidate someone, control someone, or force someone to do something against their will’. We look at the fact that violence does not have to be physical in order to achieve this end; it can be physical, psychological or sexual. We also include violence to objects under a separate definition as men sometimes see this as a kind of substitute violence which is used as an alternative to the real thing. As the programme extends his understanding of the types of violence he uses, so the man may realise that his use of behaviour such as intimidating his partner by persistent questioning, threatening her, using jealousy and isolation are also ways of getting her to do something which is against her will. He may also recognise that the physically violent behaviour which he wants to mystify as having no purpose is suddenly given one. He wanted her to do what he wanted. His physical violence is intentional! We challenge his ‘blind rage’ theory as being unsatisfactory and aimed at avoiding responsibility for his actions. We focus on breaking down present and past violent incidents - what the situation was, what preceded it, what the man actually said, what his intentions were, what he believed about the situation, what he felt, how exactly he used violence and how and why he stopped. Invariably the man sees this as an event in which he was provoked by his partner to such a level of anger that he lost control and did not know what he was doing, so he lashed out. We tell the man that if he is so little in control of himself then he is dangerous. He must learn something about the way he feels and acts in situations where he has been violent and abusive in the past. He must focus on his cues or signals, patterns in his behaviour, situations where in the past he has been violent, in order to begin to take the responsibility for making himself safe to be around. Developing this skill means that he can learn to avoid using violence. As the man proceeds through the programme he works on his personal safety plan. This may include learning to take a ‘time out’ when he recognises he is escalating a situation where he has usually resorted to abuse or violence in the past. He may need to work on issues of self esteem, alcohol abuse, bottling up feelings, and his attitudes to jealousy and provocation. His personal safety plan may also contain a list or description of situations in which he feels small, insignificant or unimportant. We freely suggest areas for inclusion in his safety plan. While we may challenge many of his assumptions however, we also add that if these are the factors which he feels are behind his violence and which make him dangerous then he has a responsibility to work on these issues in order to make himself safe. If he does not do so then we need to examine whether he wants to take on that responsibility, or whether his safety plan needs to be amended. For the woman who has been a victim of violence at the hands of her partner and who continues to live with him, the fact that he now takes more responsibility for his own behaviour and works towards making himself safe may offer some reassurance. Despite this, coexisting with someone who constantly monitors himself to avoid the recurrence of violent outbursts can hardly be a secure experience. The types of situations which made the man feel angry or insecure, which saw him storm out for a drink, which provoked a row which resulted in abuse or violence are hardly likely to disappear. While the man may have learned some skills in how to anticipate his responses in many of these situations, he also needs to learn that he cannot control the world in which he lives and further that he cannot and should not control those with whom he lives. We are also aware that many men's violent behaviour may have been routinised into something which is not acute and related to angry outbursts but is instead a chronic, persistent intimidation and undermining of his partner. This behaviour will not be addressed by violence avoidance exercises or other techniques of behaviour-management. The man has to confront the attitudes, expectations and beliefs through which he has endorsed his use of violence and abuse in the first place. He needs to understand the context in which he uses violence, be it physical or otherwise, namely that he does so in order to establish and maintain his power and control in relationships with women - whom he considers as his subordinates. As the programme breaks down each incident of violence or abuse therefore, we look at the beliefs and expectations which underpin the man's behaviour. If violence is seen initially by the man as an explosion, the breakdown can reveal that it most often occurs when his partner defies his expectations of authority and denies him the services he expects in certain situations. These expectations generally conform to his usually rigid views as to what denotes proper male and female behaviour. Given his fixed stereotyping of these roles the ‘challenge’ which he experiences to his authority when his partner behaves out of role by not obeying him or contradicting him or by acting without his consent, may cause a sudden crisis of confidence in himself and in the integrity of his role. His ‘anger’ or ‘temper’ which results in violence is his way of restoring order and authority to any threatening situation. His violence therefore is used to get him peace and quiet, sex, his supper promptly on the table or money to go out. He uses violence and abuse intentionally in order to stay powerful. If the man does not need to remain powerful, then it is less likely that he will be violent, but the programme cannot guarantee that men will begin to relate to their partners as equals simply because it is right or good that they should. For many men the concept of equality in a relationship is alien; their fear is that if they lose or relinquish power their partner will seize it! The process of ‘power sharing’ or living as equals is opposed by a lifetime of socialisation and the reinforcement of living within an unequal society. Some men will attempt to portray themselves as already having an equal relationship because of their willingness to perform ‘women's work’, e.g. by ‘helping her out’ with the dishes. Others will resist the idea of having an equal relationship as being not natural. In short, men are not likely to relinquish power unless they can see good reasons, i.e. good for them as well as others, as to why they should. The programme therefore examines with the man the consequences of his violence for himself and his partner. Most men when asked to consider the gains and losses of using violence answer somewhat sheepishly that there are no gains, "you only lose." The restoration of authority and the obtaining of services, which is the intention behind the violence, are the gains. But these are short term and often illusory. The losses of love, respect, companionship, intimacy and trust are real and lasting, resulting in a relationship that is based on fear or else the departure of the woman whom the man has been so concerned to keep under his control. As the man nears the end of his required time on the programme we hope that he has learned something about owning his behaviour, understanding why he behaves as he does and what the cost of his use of violence and abuse has been. He may also have learned other skills in the process whose absence may not have made him violent, but whose accumulation may nevertheless make him a safer person to himself and others. The programme always stresses to men that completion does not constitute the conclusion of the work that they must do; they are only beginning to learn how to end their violence.   Conferences CHANGE hosted two major conferences in 1990, the first of which was held on 15 January at the University of Stirling. The purpose of the conference was to launch the CHANGE Project and to bring together for discussion people working in the statutory and voluntary sector whose work involved the issue of domestic abuse. It was opened by CHANGE staff and management representatives who described the origins and objectives of the Project and then the day focussed on how one North American men’s programme - ‘Manalive’ in Marin County, California - operates in practice. The main speakers were Hamish Sinclair from ‘Manalive’ and Donna Garske from the Marin Abused Women’s Service. Some of the issues about the relationship between men’s programmes and women’s shelters (refuges) were examined. One hundred and two delegates representing social work, the police, court officials, solicitors, the prison service, the RSSPCC, Women’s Aid and others attended. The conference attracted a lot of publicity and was covered on television, radio and in the national and local press. Later that year CHANGE held a one day conference and associated workshops on the theme of ‘Developing a Comprehensive Community Response to Male Violence against Women’ from 3 - 6 September. Ellen Pence and Michael Paymar from the Domestic Abuse Intervention Project (DAIP) of Duluth, Minnesota were the main speakers and workshop leaders. DAIP’s men’s programme, like CHANGE, works with men who have been referrred by courts. Welcoming remarks were made by Professor A J Forty, Principal of Stirling University, and the conference was introduced by Mr Ian Ross, the Director of Social Work for Central Region, who also chaired the day’s events. Speakers from CHANGE and DAIP spoke about practice issues and experiences in co-ordinating responses to domestic violence from the police, social work agencies, the criminal justice system and the community. The two associated workshops on ‘Working with Women who experience Male Violence’ and ‘Running a Programme for Violent Men’ proved to be stimulating and widely appreciated by the delegates. Both the conference and workshops attracted much interest from the UK and abroad. Delegates, representing a wide range of agencies and interests, came from the UK, Norway, Germany, Holland and the USA.   Contributions to other conferences/workshops We have been invited to attend and contribute to many conferences and workshops since the project began, although constraints of time and resources have sometimes dictated that we have had to limit acceptance of such invitations. On two occasions we have given presentations at meetings of the Working with Offenders Group at the Overnewton Centre, Glasgow. This is an informal group which comprises social workers, psychologists, psychiatrists and academics who are working with violent offenders, and who meet to discuss practice issues in their various disciplines. We have also been the guest speakers at two conferences of the Scottish Association for the Study of Delinquency, one in Edinburgh and the other in Glasgow, and at the Annual General Meeting of the Central Region Branch of the Scottish Association for the Care and Resettlement of Offenders. We attended and held workshops on the CHANGE men’s programme at the Association of Directors of Social Work Conference in Aviemore in December 1990, and at the Prison Social Workers’ Conference at the Scottish Prison Service College, Polmont on 31 January and 1 February 1991. On 14 February we were guest speakers at a seminar for members of Nottingham Domestic Violence Forum, an organisation comprising representatives of statutory and voluntary bodies committed to developing a community response to domestic violence.   Visits to other programmes Last spring, we spent ten days in the United States visiting men’s programmes in three cities in two different States. We went to learn how these programmes operate, how they liaise and tie in with the women’s shelter movement and how they relate to agencies of the criminal justice system. Our first stop was in Duluth, Minnesota, where the Domestic Abuse Intervention Project (DAIP) has been operating for ten years. This is the acknowledged model in the USA for a multi-agency, criminal justice based approach to domestic abuse. DAIP had arranged for us to hold discussions with representatives from all the different aspects of the project’s work. Starting at DAIP headquarters, we met project staff, who described the various aspects of the network of agencies and organisations which comprise DAIP. DAIP is the co-ordinating body for a variety of programmes around the whole issue of domestic abuse. There are fifteen to eighteen groups of various sorts running at any one time. As well as running the re-education programme for men there are a number of supportive programmes for women which offer shelter, transitional housing and legal advocacy. There are also programmes for the children involved. There were, at that time, one hundred and twenty men in various stages of re-education programmes. The majority of the men are court mandated although some attend on a voluntary basis. DAIP also have a training mandate for a variety of agencies which involves working with the police, court officials, community groups and schools. We were invited to visit the women’s shelter and talk with shelter workers and women’s advocates whose task is to assist abused women in their dealings with court, housing and welfare representatives. We observed a session of the men’s programme and held discussions with group leaders. We also met with a judge who outlined a number of the legal procedures by which men can be placed on the programme which we later saw in operation in his family court. The City Attorney outlined how the existence of DAIP had affected practice in the prosecution of domestic violence offenders. Two senior police officers spoke about how police attitudes and responses had been informed and influenced by DAIP and in particular how this had affected changes in arrest policy. Our second stop was the Domestic Abuse Project (DAP), in Minneapolis, Minnesota, which shares many characteristics with DAIP. DAP had also arranged a schedule of meetings for us with staff from the women’s and men’s programmes. We were invited to visit two women’s shelters, one of which was purpose built, and talked to staff concerned. Additionally we met outreach programme workers, who run community support groups for women, and in Minneapolis Civic Centre we visited the office of the DAP women’s legal advocacy service. At DAP we discussed with the Director how the various services they provide relate to each other. We also met one of the women who facilitates a women’s group and two of the men’s programme facilitators who told us about the programme’s content and style. DAP’s training remit for other agencies and organisations is similar to that of DAIP and we were fortunate to be invited to attend a training session for new police recruits where the police response to domestic violence was the subject of the day. Our final visit was to the EMERGE men’s programme in Boston. Unlike DAP or DAIP, EMERGE developed as a self-referral programme and while it is not formally part of a co-ordinated response to domestic violence, does accept some court referrals. The content of work in men’s programmes elsewhere has been greatly influenced by EMERGE’s experience since 1972 and the other programmes we visited acknowledged this contribution. We met with key staff, sat in on a session for men who had completed the EMERGE programme but who now chose to attend an ongoing support group on a weekly basis. These men readily engaged in discussion and answered many of the questions and issues we raised with them. That evening we attended an early stage group of court-mandated men where the workers were using the ‘Manalive’ format for confronting men’s violence. It was particularly interesting to see in practice in Boston something which we had been introduced to only a few months earlier at the CHANGE January Conference in Stirling.   Media coverage Besides the media attention generated by conferences, CHANGE has attracted a wide interest from the press and broadcasting media, both in Scotland and the UK as a whole. CHANGE has been the subject of feature articles in the local press and in The Scotsman and The Glasgow Herald. Interviews have also been given to New Woman and Elle magazines. A number of independent television production companies have also contacted us with a view to producing documentary programmes. In our contact with the media CHANGE has endeavoured to stress that men’s programmes have only a small part to play in putting an end to men’s abuse of women, that they are not a substitute for the still pressing needs of abused women and their children and that there is a danger that in focussing attention on men and men’s programmes we lose sight of these needs.   Future Plans CHANGE will continue to develop the men’s programme and expand the number of groups being run as referrals increase. We plan to start a follow-up group on a voluntary basis for men who have completed the required sixteen weeks and are addressing the practical issues involved in this. In the longer term we also hope to offer a role to men who have been through the programme and who wish to contribute to CHANGE’s work in the community. In addition to a commitment to undertaking in-service training for agencies involved with the men’s programme, such as social workers and police, CHANGE also has a remit to develop educational materials for use in the wider community. This will include material for others whose work brings them into direct contact with the issue of domestic violence, such as health care professionals and teachers, and general information for the public. The aims of such materials will be to raise the profile of domestic violence as being unacceptable and illegal, to stimulate debate and understanding of its origins and supports, to inform and influence professional practice, and to promote social change.   CHANGE: A VIEW FROM SCOTTISH WOMEN’S AID The programme Men’s violence in the home is unacceptable, and domestic assault is just as much a crime as violence in the street. Indeed being on the receiving end of violence from the man designated "partner" is likely to have more severe, wider reaching and longer term effects on a woman’s life, and on the lives of her children. The only step a woman can take by herself to ensure that she will have a future free from violence is to leave the violent relationship. Any other decision will have an outcome which is influenced by the man’s actions and decisions. Women often want the relationship to continue, but the violence to stop, and so their safety continues to be dependent on the outcome of the man’s decisions. Therefore it is important that men, who often say that they do not want to continue to be violent, are offered the appropriate support to make such decisions effectively in their lives. There are, in addition, some important aspects of CHANGE which are distinct from some other kinds of programmes for violent men. In particular, CHANGE has had the support of the Scottish Women’s Aid network in its development. Scottish Women’s Aid’s experience and understanding of the predicament of abused women and their children demonstrates that there are certain conditions which a programme for violent men must satisfy in order to be effective, both in offering the possibilities of changed behaviour to violent men and in promoting change at a societal level. These conditions include the understanding that violence against women in the home occurs as a result of the relative positions of men and women in society; that men are fully, solely and unequivocally responsible for their own violence; that alcohol abuse, stress, deprivation etc. are excuses which allow men to shift the responsibility for their own decision to be violent; that only a court sentenced option for violent men will adequately demonstrate that our society finds domestic violence unacceptable and thus only a court sentenced option will adequately reinforce and build on the potential for change in individual men; that it is imperative that men’s projects continually demonstrate commitment to ensuring the safety of women, including the increased provision of safe refuge and other options for women and children, and in so doing be guided by Women’s Aid. CHANGE was the first project in Europe to set up a programme of re-education for violent men which aims to take full account of the interests of those women and children by satisfying those conditions. Because it does so, Scottish Women‘s Aid supports and is actively involved in CHANGE. Last year in Scotland 3396 women, with an unknown number of children, were unable to find a Women’s Aid refuge space that they desperately needed and wanted. Refuge places were found for 1888 women and 3002 children, while a further 10192 women were helped by Women’s Aid in other ways. The problem, therefore, is not a small one, especially when account is taken of all the abused women who have not yet made the decision to approach Women’s Aid. In recognising the value of work with violent men, it is important never to lose sight of the reality of life for the thousands of women who live in fear. Women’s Aid supports work with violent men in some trepidation, particularly as the Scottish Women’s Aid network has this year lost ten refuge spaces in Falkirk, in the very area where CHANGE operates, and in the very year in which CHANGE was first funded. Time will tell whether, yet again, resources for men’s work will be more plentiful than resources for women and children.   Diversion Men have denied, minimised and trivialised their violence towards women for hundreds of years, and the CHANGE programme is one positive example of how men can be helped out of this destructive pattern towards a new understanding that they too can live a life free from violence, if they choose it. The CHANGE programme holds high the message that men must take responsibility for their violence if they are to change it. But how can our criminal justice system, which has so often failed abused women and children, influence the whole process towards a society in which women and children no longer have to live in fear? It is a criminal offence to assault a woman, and this is no less the case when the perpetrator is the woman’s partner, and the scene of the crime the private domain of the family home. This crime however, unlike most others, has remained hidden by men’s denial, and until recent times the male dominated institutions of our society have willingly colluded in the cover-up. Now, thanks mainly to the work of Women’s Aid voicing the concerns of abused women and their children, the crime is explicitly recognised in policy statements of all kinds, in every sphere. But policy is only the first step. The institutions, and in particular the criminal justice system, must dismantle the practices and the conventions which continue to condone and reinforce violence against women, despite policy statements to the contrary. Diversion is one such convention. Because the crime has been minimised for so long, it takes strong action to convince society to recognise it as such, and to introduce a practice which treats the offender accordingly. The objectives of diversion are admirable in the extent to which they provide appropriate opportunities for the rehabilitation of offenders who commit crimes which are universally and actually subject to condemnation. Diversion of domestic violence offenders, however, will subvert those objectives insofar as diversion is perceived as an ambivalent response to the crime itself. The message that society regards violence against women in the home as entirely unacceptable is not yet universally understood, and until it is, decisions to divert violent men will be confusing and ambiguous, and such diversion will be inappropriate. Scottish Office guidance on diversion recognises the particular difficulty of the decision to divert in cases of domestic violence, but unfortunately does not go far enough in discouraging its use in these cases. There is recognition of the need to ensure the safety of the woman and children involved, but insufficient attention is paid to the significance of the message to the wider community, as well as to the individual woman and man, within the current context of ambivalence about the crime. Within this context, a diversion scheme cannot carry an authoritative statement condemning the crime. On a positive note, however, it is possible for the criminal justice system in Central Region to disseminate just that message, while at the same time offering all the rehabilitative advantages which fines and prison sentences fail to offer. In Central Region, the CHANGE programme is available, and the courts can be assured that the sentence will offer all the individual advantages of diversion, while at the same time offering the opportunity to put policy into practice in the case of domestic violence.   Management Committee Professor Sally Brown Shona Campbell Dr Rebecca Dobash Dr Russell Dobash (Treasurer) Mark Donnelly Elizabeth Kennedy Doris Littlejohn Sue McLaughlin (Convenor) Graeme McRoberts Ian Shovlin Margaret Taylor (Secretary) Joyce Watkinson Helen Whincup   Advisory Group Ms Eva Comrie, Solicitor Mr Peter Crow, Sheriff Clerk Councillor Elizabeth Kennedy, Central Regional Council Mr Anthony McNulty, Social Work Department Ms Anne Morrison, Scottish Women’s Aid Inspector Sam Muir, Central Scotland Police Sheriff - rotating Ms Sharon Stirrat, Victim Support Scheme Mr Keith Valentine, Procurator Fiscal Councillor Anne Wallace, Central Regional Council Mr Harold Wilson, Education Department Mrs Muriel Young, Forth Valley Health Board   Project Staff Dorothy Anderson, Administrator David Morran and Monica Wilson, Co-ordinators                A charitable company limited by guarantee registered in Scotland No 183989             Scottish Charity No SCO18322          CHANGE acknowledges funding from the Scottish Executive