The development of batterer treatment program standards was a well-intentioned and reasonable step, given the increasing number of batterers being court-referred to treatment, the poor quality of some treatment programs, and the move toward a coordinated community response to domestic violence. While treatment standards were derived from the understanding of husband violence, as it existed at the time, newer research data do not validate many of the assumptions underlying current standards. This point is illustrated by considering four such assumptions: (1) conjoint treatment is never appropriate, (2) we know the best length, content, and process of treatment, (3) in treatment, one size fits all, and (4) doing something is better than doing nothing. Recent research data relevant to each assumption is also considered. Given the lack of empirical support for these assumptions, it is too early to impose standards mandating one type of treatment. In fact, doing so may stifle what is needed most at this time-the development of new intervention approaches that may increase treatment efficacy. However, with the freedom to develop new interventions comes the responsibility to empirically validate these approaches. Thus, it is recommended that all batterer treatment programs strive to conduct research on the effectiveness of their interventions and to make public their findings.
Tijdschrift beschrijving