|
The Caledonian System An integrated approach to address men's domestic abuse and increase the safety of women and children Being prepared for The Scottish Accreditation Panel for Offender Programmes
Following the Justice Department’s letter of January 2004 stating that domestic violence was now a priority for programme development, Scottish practitioners considered that a joint bid was the best way of ensuring the distillation of good practice from 15 years’ experience in Scotland coupled with knowledge from developing research about ‘what works’ in this field. The Caledonian intervention system developed by key practitioners from CHANGE, DVPP and SACRO has the backing of a number of local authorities, viz; the City of Edinburgh and the Lothian and Scottish Borders consortium; Dumfries and Galloway; the Forth Valley partnership; Glasgow City and South Lanarkshire. The key practitioners involved are founder members of Respect, the National Association for Domestic Violence Perpetrator Programmes and Associated Services. This development will be in line with Respect’s Statement of Principles and Minimum Standards of Practice (SoP), (2000 & 2004) as endorsed by the Scottish Executive’s National Strategy to Address Domestic Abuse (2000).
The Caledonian intervention systemThe original CHANGE and DVPP programmes were both based on knowledge gained from North American projects including the Duluth Domestic Abuse Intervention Project. They were based on what the research at that time deemed to be effective practice, while acknowledging that such research was sparse and not conclusive. Since then much more has been learned about the ramifications of domestic abuse as well as what appears to make for effective intervention practice. CHANGE, DVPP and Sacro have recognised these developments and have attempted to update their practice accordingly. However, this can be problematic given the day-to-day demands of each agency’s commitments. We therefore embraced the opportunity afforded by the accreditation process to start again from scratch and design a model intervention system based on current theory, experience and best practice: the Caledonian. While the evidence for ‘what works’ with men who abuse is not conclusive, it is compelling. There is a strong international consensus that perpetrator programmes should be accompanied by adequate provision for the safety and security of women and children, including services such as advocacy, safety planning, support, education groups and safe housing (Barnish, 2004). As well as giving priority to the safety and autonomy of abused women, these services can play a key role in ensuring the accountability of programmes and the monitoring of abusers’ behaviour (Mullender & Burton, 2001, Respect, 2004). Emphasis on perpetrator programmes as public safety programmes rather than as treatment may ensure the focus is kept on victim safety, particularly as victims are more likely to stay with perpetrators if they are enrolled onto programmes (Gondolf, 1988b). This is in line with the Executive’s three-fold intended outcomes for community-based interventions: public protection, reduction of custody and social inclusion of rehabilitated offenders (McNeill et al, 2005). We also suggest that the development of Multi-Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) on the lines of those in England and Wales and the use of Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conferences (MARAC) will lead to better inter-agency links and keep agencies focussed on women’s and children’s safety (Hester, et al, 2006; Robinson, 2004). The Caledonian system of intervention is informed by a growing body of research about the nature of domestic abuse, the experiences of practitioners, the needs of women and children who have been subject to men’s abuse, the characteristics of men who abuse, and an understanding of ‘what works’ to keep women and children safe and to assist men who abuse to change.
Theoretical model and intervention systemDomestic abuse is a complex phenomenon, influenced by a number of inter-related factors. It comprises a pattern of behaviour which is ongoing rather than individual isolated acts of violence.[1] It is asymmetrical in shape being perpetrated predominantly by men on women – a crucial element in understanding the issue. It has been historically permitted, even encouraged, and reinforced overtly or covertly by social institutions both secular and religious; supporting the need to advocate for women facing service-generated risk. On current evidence we can state that domestic abuse is intentional, if not always conscious, learned behaviour which is seen as normative in many societies, and accepted as so even by some men and women in our society. It stems from historic and culturally sanctioned traditions of male privilege. The historical context is of particular importance in understanding violence against women in general and domestic abuse in particular, as throughout history such behaviour has been accepted and even encouraged (Dobash & Dobash, 1979). The current social context is influenced by history and enables us to understand the ambivalence in social attitudes to domestic abuse which has seen institutions and social attitudes reluctant to accept both the prevalence of and responsibility for the phenomenon. This is notable in the responses to campaigns by women’s advocates over the last thirty years for recognition of the problem and provision of services to women and children which have been dogged by denial that domestic abuse is widespread and a reluctance to devote sufficient funding to the issue. While much has now been achieved in changing, for examples, police and criminal justice responses, there still remains much to be done to educate and change institutional responses and social attitudes to domestic abuse. The most complete theoretical explanations of domestic abuse take an ecological approach which considers the interactions among historical context, broad social context, interpersonal context and the individual’s intra-psychic features (Dutton, 1995; Edelson & Tolman, 1992). This multi layered approach to understanding domestic abuse places it in an historical and social context, then examines the individual’s developmental experiences within this context, and then looks at those individual factors which relate directly to his use of abuse to his partner. These last include such matters as his developmental history, his possible experience of abuse and neglect as a child, his exposure to violent models, his degree of empathy, his ability to manage his emotions, his response to handling conflict and the level of anxiety over relationship changes. The individual response is influenced by his exposure to elements in the previous levels. From each of these theories we can identify appropriate targets to address in domestic violence intervention. Given the complexity of the factors contributing to domestic abuse, the Caledonian uses a multi-method approach and seeks to effect change among the dynamic elements of the ecological system well as encourage change by individual men.
Key features of the CaledonianThe Caledonian therefore takes the form of an intervention system comprising: 1. The development of interagency protocols coupled with training, designed to maximise women’s and children’s safety and thus reduce likelihood of men’s re-offending. 2. A two year programme of intervention work with men comprising preparation and motivation sessions; a groupwork element of a minimum of six months duration, individual programmed work for men deemed unsuitable for group work and post group relapse prevention work. 3. A service to women partners, ex-partners and children including personal contact from a women’s services worker. CHANGE continues to work with Edinburgh’s DVPP, the SACRO Forth Valley Partnership and a number of interested local authorities to develop the Caledonian System. Drafts of the theory, and men’s programme manuals were submitted, and a presentation made to the Panel in October 2005. The feedback from the panel was constructive and encouraging and further funding was granted by the Justice Department to allow the work to continue through 2006-7 with the goal of completion by March 2007. An interim submission was made to the Panel in October 2006 for guidance.
[1]
Although the terms domestic violence and domestic abuse are
sometimes used interchangeably, the Caledonian uses the terms
specifically (violence is physical; abuse is sexual psychological,
emotional) to differentiate the event of violence from the
process of abuse.
|
