Citation

Hamel J, Cannon C, Buttell F, Ferreira R. Partner Abuse 2020; 11(4): 387-414.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2020, Springer Publishing)

DOI

10.1891/PA-2020-0024

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

A debate persists regarding the effectiveness of batterer intervention programs (BIPs), the predominant form of intervention for individuals who have perpetrated intimate partner violence (IPV). Social science research has identified some promising research trends--for example, the effectiveness of motivational interviewing and process factors that maintain an effective therapist-client alliance, what clients say facilitators can do to keep them engaged and motivated, and, for certain low-risk populations, the viability of couples counseling. Unfortunately, most frontline treatment providers lack access to much of this research, which appears primarily in peer-reviewed journals. A previous national survey of BIPs reported that, on the whole, BIP group facilitators have ample clinical experience, but are poorly informed about IPV risk factors and dynamics; and while they report substantial training, the nature of that training, and the extent to which the training accurately reflects current research, remains unknown. BIPs, and most treatment providers, including licensed mental health professionals, depend on organizations who too often lack reliable, up-to-date information about domestic violence. The Association of Domestic Violence Intervention Providers (ADVIP) was created by the first author to provide a platform where researchers and providers could cooperate by exchanging information and resources. This article reports on findings from a larger follow-up to the 2016 survey, that sought to elicit views on how to increase cooperation between domestic violence scholars and treatment providers and advance evidence-based practice, and to gauge the role of ADVIP in this effort.

Language: en