BBC article on domestic violence - 'family based' solutions - why is it making me uncomfortable?

[ArabellaScott]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68942471

Front page BBC.

First family were 'helped to stay together' despite the man being controlling and abusive.

Second family is a male victim of abuse.

I looked into the organisations 'for baby's sake' and 'Foundations'. Part of the latter's approach involves seeking to push an American organisation in the UK - 'Fathers for change'.

Is it just me who finds the focus, omissions, and dynamic of this reporting and the underlying drive slightly off?

Why do I have the feeling this is about getting women to shut up about dv? It looks like it has aspects of MRA movements to me. But maybe others have different perspectives?

'In 2015, Project Mirabal (www.dur.ac.uk/criva/projectmirabal/), was published with the results of a 5-year investigation into the effectiveness of perpetrator programmes in the UK. The data collected came from: interviews with DAPP staff and stakeholders, programme data from 11 different DAPPs, surveys and in-depth interviews with male perpetrators, partners and children. Crucially, measures of success were not focused on just physical violence. The 6 outcome measures were: increase in respectful communications, reduction in physical and sexual violence, increased freedoms for women, increase in safe, positive and shared parenting, change in perpetrators understanding of the impact of their behaviour, and improved childhoods.

Results for the impact of the programmes on physical and sexual violence were impressive, with positive changes in all 7 markers for physical and sexual abuse reported by women 12 months after the programme started. Those injured as a result of violence fell from 61% to just 2%. Two forms of abuse, use of a weapon (30%) and pressure to unwanted sexual activity (29%) stopped completely, potentially lethal behaviours (strangle, choke, drown, smother) dropped from 50% to 2% and lower risk violence (punch, kick, burn, beaten) also dropped to 2% from 54%.

The effects of abuse on children were also reduced with those seeing/overhearing violence dropping from 80% to 8%. Harassment and other abusive acts continued for over a quarter of women, but this did reduce for the majority of women with over half, 51%, indicating they felt very safe by the 12-month point compared to just 8% at the start. However, the areas that women were most eager to see change: financial control, sexual jealousy, positive parenting and restrictions on day-to-day activities, did not change as much as women hoped for, with only marginal positive indicators.'

So basically, the relationships stayed abusive/coercive, with a reduction in some forms of violence and abuse.

Ask a woman who has escaped an abusive relationship, and she will probably be able to tell you whether she thinks the psychological abuse, control, and coercion was 'less bad' than the physical.

https://www.dvact.org/post/can-domestic-abuse-perpetrator-programmes-really-change-behaviour

https://projectmirabal.co.uk/

If it works, I’d set aside how I feel about it.

The reality is that lots of women in controlling and abusive relationships don’t recognise that their partner is controlling or abusive. To them it’s normal. We know that, for women in those relationships, pregnancy increases the risk of violence or death. We also know that, even when physical violence is involved, women don’t leave straight away and many take several attempts before they leave for good. If you’d offered to help to the woman in the article get out of her abusive relationship she would’ve run a mile. This scheme might not be your idea of the kind of help you’d choose to give a woman in a controlling relationship but if it’s help she’s likely to accept isn’t that better than nothing?

Even if it doesn’t manage to change the behaviour of the abusive partner in the long term, it’s at least managing to get their abused partners to recognise that they are being abused and that it’s not part of a normal relationship. It’s clearly identifying the abusive partner as the problem, putting the responsibility on them to control their anger and pointing out to the victim how they have ended up walking on eggshells because they fear their partner’s reactions. It’s also on the record that professionals had enough concerns to refer the family. Any official acknowledgment that the partner was abusive can only help the victim in the future if they end up in the family court system.

As the research that this group is only one of the ones being considered, is Government funded, is there any right to ask for them to clarify who they are considering, and have for example DV providers been consulted?

@ArabellaScott So they learnt how to maintain coercive control by the implied threat of violence instead of actual violence, thus enhancing their own social capital and chances of maintaining plausible deniability?

I suppose its better not having a broken jaw, but the women's cortisol levels must be through the roof.

(That was about Project Mirabal.)

@ArabellaScott

Worked in DV and SV for 20 years. Ran a womens Aid affiliated refuge service providing outreach telephone help, refuge counselling legal clinic. No perps programme i might add.

Firstly a few posters referring to victim loving perp will not leave etc. Please read Evan Stark on this, you will then understand what domestic terrorism is and how it works to prevent women leaving.

As regards this project as far as i am concerned it is the same old same old. A perpetrator programme. Except it breaks all the agreed practice rules established over many years about keeping the victim safe and having separate advocacy for the VICTIM and children.

Based on my own experiences of negotiating and intervening in perpetrator programmes, set up and practice, this never worked. The Support staff for the perpetrator, without variation, and unsurprisingly, would get drawn in to and advocating for the perpetrator.

They would write spurious and easily demolished reports to the Courts, and shut their eyes to being themselves manipulated.

The Probation service programme was reviewed by (the now) professor Elizabeth Gilchrist, some time ago the re offending rate was 88% according to her.

Subsequent reviews of local non mandated programmes revealed a similar pattern.

She was at the time part of Warwick university, Make research count, project along with Mulholland et al.

I knew them then.

Note Elizabeth is now at Edinburgh.

Last i spoke to her she was working on profiling different types of DV abusers, saw a paper by her on this, on google.

My two pence was that there are personality disorder types (most prevalent), psychotic types, just plain bad type.

This kind of project gives me a rage.

As does Women's Aid services delivering Perp programmes

.That IMHO is a complete waste of time dangerous and submitting women and children to an unnecessarily prolonged misery.

Funding and resources must be focussed on support and “coaxing women and her children out of such situations.

Well, they did claim that some men were helped. But yes, I'd say 'helped to not use physical violence', while 'the areas that women were most eager to see change: financial control, sexual jealousy, positive parenting and restrictions on day-to-day activities, did not change as much as women hoped for, with only marginal positive indicators' sounds to me like the women remained cowed, controlled, and abused. Just that it was done more naicely.

And in fact I think that's worse.

It's still an abusive relationship, it's just less obvious.

Thank you, Karensalright. That's depressing to read, but what I'd feared.

a complete waste of time dangerous and submitting women and children to an unnecessarily prolonged misery.

😔

Will people in the sector like women's aid, refuges, etc, be able to input into this study? If it's just repeating work that's been done previously and been shown to not be effective, what the hell is hte point? It's millions of pounds they're looking for, that surely could be better spent supporting women and children?

The other point to make it really is collusion with the perp. Making her feel she should save him, which is a frequent feature in DV where she feels she is responsible for saving him.

I was in a "programme" along these lines after my ex had tried to strangle me (as well of many years physical and emotional abuse). It was the worst time of my life.

@Karensalright Funding and resources must be focussed on support and “coaxing women and her children out of such situations.

This. But also they deserve better from the criminal justice system and the family courts. It's terrorism.

daffodilandtulip I'm so sorry. I'm glad you got out.

Joan Smith made an interesting link...

https://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/aw/d/1787476065/ref=tmm_pap_swatch_0?ie=UTF8&dib_tag=se&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.jxxAx1ePGAKIrTFr7HX9k-Y4FL7TmeTRJjrkgAfkkM94HMhhD0FW8IZm-M9UcJ0_b_1FKA1Rs56M7BsxIrQH7NM7V2BaLUznLUmmpBvfoR_IJFJLQ0m3ozS9-0FcAs4V9pgO72evFjc6GMd0FM3UHgdAoLpZDXgRWy_Hy-EPsuICbdMxgE_fNRBtudU-jENdDY51MAFOOUyTEPdY7GXzYw.8QZcr61T0L3Nkagl4bRSxCvby5vm_J_A-K-nAeqipgE&qid=1715111720&sr=8-1

I thought they were trying this approach when there hasn’t been any physical violence?

@ArabellaScott

Womens Aid affiliates are all independent charities. I do believe that there was a membership vote against accepting Tans women into services.

So there is hope that most of the refuge services will not go for this.

However i doubt the same could be said for affiliate members, who are not women led.

I think it may be an initiative with pounds waved at local Authorities to administer.

Seen it all before will come and will go as of no marked improvements in outcomes.

I left the sector permanently around 2015, so no longer in the loop.

§

@Prawncow How are they going to know that then?

@daffodilandtulip hi there i sometimes think harnessing womens experiences about perp programmes is a way to go. We should keep our eye on this and rally mumsnetters if needs be.

Glad you are okay now.

True.

I thought the relationship in the article was the type of the situations they were targeting - non-violent controlling relationships, with pregnancy as a risk factor for escalation, where the woman didn’t recognise the relationship as abusive. I can’t understand the ‘family’ approach when there’s violence involved.

@theilltemperedclavecinist Hi i agree entirely. I set up a legal clinic within my outreach service.

The solicitors in my area were falling all over themselves to get the brief (as obviously a source of business)

I was so overwhelmed with interest that i was able to set strict criteria, an expectation was that they must go into court on emergency same day applications basis.

As light follows day we got the best barristers, and god what a team it was.

Dedicated for women by women working together. It was like a snow plow or a tank never went to magistrates always moved to county.

Never lost a case.

Wish that model was widely adopted…

I think you've put your finger on what precisely feels so off about this - the article seems to treat the two sexes very differently, with only the female victims under pressure to stay and 'make it work' (its unclear whether the programmes actually do treat the sexes differently).

How awful to be in an abusive relationship where people who are supposed to be helping you side with your adviser - made me feel a bit sick.

PPs have suggested it's no bad thing to help abusers to see the error of their ways and learn to be be different. True, it could be really useful but don't make the woman stay with the man while he tries to learn to behave better!

It looks like they are not only funded by Government (cant see which Department) but also fund groups.

Our priority areas are:

1. Supporting parenting
2. Strengthening family networks
3. Domestic abuse
4. Relationships for care experienced children
5. Service and practice models

Note domestic violence is only third on the list.
https://foundations.org.uk/opportunities/funding/

I dont understand how which ever part of the Government it is, is funding something that puts the probability of violence as not being the priority issue.

Is it worth contacting Nicole Jacobs about this? https://domesticabusecommissioner.uk/

@Prawncow Victims lie all the time about physical abuse. Perp tells them that if they leave he will keep the children because they are a terrible parent, slag, dirty, incapable etc.

And then an incident is reported by them, or the hospital, a neighbour, and guess what they are told if they dont leave the children will be removed.

Victims end up in such emotional confusion.

It’s such a mess. I know that if women do manage to leave for good they’re often forced to send their children back to their abusive exes for unsupervised visitation.

Thank you for your posts @Karensalright

Affirms the instinctive dis-ease with the article.

💐💐and thank you too, to daffodilandtulip and janie143

I agree there is a place for pragmatism - some women won't leave their partner and if it isn't at a threshold where police/social services can force a change maybe working with the couple can help. But, assuming that the woman is choosing to stay at what point is the "intervention" actually enabling. Someone very good at convincing themselves they are doing right by sticking by him, that he isn't that bad, that he has made progress is also going to be very good at convincing themselves that his participation in the programme is proof of his goodness, or that the programme runners themselves approve of the relationship because they are helping to make it better. I think it could be very easy for the supposed neutral third party to be drawn into an unhealthy dynamic.

I also think there is a place for early intervention - but ideally that should be happening before the men even get into a relationship - working with boys or young adults who might have seen violence growing up to reprogramme their attitudes/boost their own self esteem. I would be so happy for my taxes to go to a really good, in depth support programme like that because at the moment support is really patchy. Even targeted/advertised support for men to access really early in a relationship if they are worried about repeating patterns would be good. It would take self awareness/motivation, but without that self awareness/motivation I don't think the programmes would work anyway. Waiting for the relationship to become coercive/abusive is leaving it too late.