My recent column Researcher Says Women’s Initiation of Domestic Violence Predicts Risk to Women (Huffington Post, 7/6/09) discusses some important new research on violence in families.

To post a comment on Huffington Post concerning the column, click here.

In the column, I wrote:

How can we prevent Intimate Partner Violence and injury to women? IPV researcher Deborah Capaldi, Ph.D., a social scientist at the Oregon Social Learning Center, finds that the best way for women to be safe is to not initiate violence against their male partners. According to Dr. Capaldi, “The question of initiation of violence is a crucial one… much IPV is mutual, and initiations — even that seem minor — may lead to escalation.”

Dr. Capaldi recently presented her work at “From Ideology to Inclusion 2009: New Directions in Domestic Violence Research and Intervention,” an IPV conference in Los Angeles June 26-28. While studies have consistently found that women initiate as much violence against their male partners as vice versa, two-thirds of domestic violence injuries are suffered by women.

Dr. Capaldi’s research examined the different relationship violence scenarios — violence by him only, violence by her only, violence by both with him initiating, and violence by both with her initiating. Of these, the most likely to result in future injury to women is when she initiates violence against him and he responds, although both mutually aggressive groups were close in danger levels.

Dr. Capaldi notes that in a study of women who were in a battered women’s shelter, “67% of the women reported severe violence toward their partner in the past year.” Others in the domestic violence field, including Erin Pizzey, founder of the first battered women’s shelter in England in the early 1970s, have had similar findings.

According to Dr. Capaldi, “Overall, young couples with unidirectional violence report fewer acts and forms of violence than bidirectional couples.”

Read the full column here.

To learn more about the Conference, please click here.

I recently attended the excellent Los Angeles domestic violence conference “From Ideology to Inclusion 2009: New Directions in Domestic Violence Research and Intervention.”

The conference featured many domestic violence dissidents–researchers and clinicians who do not believe that the mainstream domestic violence establishment and its “men as perpetrators/women as victims” conceptual framework is properly serving those involved in family violence.

Dr. Michelle Carney, associate professor at the University of Georgia, says that she has often had conflicts with the DV establishment, explaining:

I’m continually being told by domestic violence people not to talk about violent women… when I discuss female abusers with [leading Georgia domestic violence authorities], I can see them immediately tense up.

Carney explained that under the current system, “many female perpetrators are put in battered women’s shelters instead of batterers’ treatment programs.”

With the violent women who do end up in batterers treatment programs, she says it is interesting the way they are different than male batterers. She says that male batterers tend to minimize their own domestic violence. By contrast, women generally don’t, and will sometimes boast about their violence against their male partners.

I would guess that this is reflective of two factors:

1) Because of the often draconian and anti-male domestic violence arrest policies, some of the men in batterers’ treatment programs are not batterers, and do not belong there.

2) Society has always condemned male violence against women. The feminists, to their credit, have made this condemnation even firmer. By contrast, traditionally women’s violence has not been taken seriously, and the feminists have unfortunately helped to cement this.

The result, of course, is that male abusers may minimize their violence because their violence is socially stigmatized, while female abusers are less likely to minimize their violence, because their violence is not socially stigmatized. In fact, one gets the impression from Carney’s experience that these women feel that their violence against their male partners will be applauded.

To read all reports from the Conference, please click here.

From Ideology to Inclusion 2009 featured some of the world’s leading experts on domestic violence, many of whom serve on the Editorial Board of the new peer-reviewed academic journal, Partner Abuse, published by Springer Publishing Company. The conference was presented by the California Alliance for Families & Children and co-sponsored by The Family Violence Treatment & Education Association. Some of you may remember that I also wrote extensively about the 2008 conference–to learn more, click here.

I recently attended the excellent Los Angeles domestic violence conference “From Ideology to Inclusion 2009: New Directions in Domestic Violence Research and Intervention.”

The conference featured many domestic violence dissidents–researchers and clinicians who do not believe that the mainstream domestic violence establishment and its “men as perpetrators/women as victims” conceptual framework is properly serving those involved in family violence.

Lonnie Hazelwood, MSHP, LCDC, CCCJS, who has worked in the domestic violence and chemical dependency fields for over 25 years, began receiving his training in domestic violence in the late 1970s. He explained:

I would ask abusive men’s wives if they had been violent and I got a lot of grief for it by from others in the domestic violence establishment, but I persisted. I found that many of the abused women were also violent. I was very surprised by this. The women readily admitted that their use of violence. Violence was fairly even between men and women.

I began to do “partner contact monitoring” to see if the men in our programs continued to abuse, and also if the women continued to abuse.

Hazelwood noted that many of these couples were mutually abusive, and needed couples counseling. He explained:

Feminists and the domestic violence shelters have been very effective in passing laws to prohibit couples counseling and programs which use gender inclusive strategies. Texas may soon be banning some of the programs I am currently doing.

Hazelwood also said that about half of family violence — both partner abuse and child abuse — is “associated” with substance abuse. He explained that “although for most people, substances are not causative of violence or abuse, there are a significant minority where violence ends as soon as the substance abuse ends.”

The feminist domestic violence establishment has correctly noted that being drunk or on drugs is certainly no excuse for committing abuse. However, this has been taken too far, and many clinicians complain that substance abuse as a causative factor in domestic violence is not addressed seriously enough.

To read all reports from the Conference, please click here.

From Ideology to Inclusion 2009 featured some of the world’s leading experts on domestic violence, many of whom serve on the Editorial Board of the new peer-reviewed academic journal, Partner Abuse, published by Springer Publishing Company. The conference was presented by the California Alliance for Families & Children and co-sponsored by The Family Violence Treatment & Education Association. Some of you may remember that I also wrote extensively about the 2008 conference–to learn more, click here.

I recently attended the excellent Los Angeles domestic violence conference “From Ideology to Inclusion 2009: New Directions in Domestic Violence Research and Intervention.”

The conference featured many domestic violence dissidents–researchers and clinicians who do not believe that the mainstream domestic violence establishment and its “men as perpetrators/women as victims” conceptual framework is properly serving those involved in family violence.

Carol Crabson is the Executive Director of the Valley Oasis domestic violence shelter, which has served male victims for 17 years. At the conference she discussed her experiences running a shelter which accepts male victims. She explained:

The way Valley Oasis is set up, we have four individual cottages. And the cottages over the years have been expanded and renovated, and so each cottage is in a unique little setup, depending. Some of the have two bedrooms, some three, some four. And they all have their own kitchens, their laundry facilities, a common area. So we utilize our setup to be able to provide services to all victims of domestic violence. We have a cottage for men, and men with children. We have rooms set up that we can bring in male children over the age of 13, and have them somewhat separated from female teenagers of the same age…

Our setup is conducive to being able to provide a wide variety of services to all victims of domestic violence. And more than that, it’s the attitude of the staff. And for the past twelve-and-a-half years that I’ve been there, and previously to that, Patricia Overberg, the executive director, who 17 to 18 years ago, said, “Hey, all victims need services, nobody deserves to be hit,” started bringing in male victims. So she set the stage, but also she set the climate, the culture, the attitude of that agency, that this is what we do.

We do have services specifically for male victims. They receive individual counseling, they receive men’s support groups, they receive case management on an individual basis. But we also utilize transference and counter-transference in our groups. And we bring both genders in to do therapeutic groups. And what we find is that it’s very effective to them.

Being able to talk to a male, for a female victim, who is not going to be abusive to her, who is not going to be condescending, or is not going to verbally attack her — and vice versa — really, it’s part of the healing process. To be able to sit in a room with someone that will totally respect you, that can validate your feelings and your issues…

Many times what we get is that we will get a female sitting in a room with a male victim who will actually apologize to the male victim for what the spouse has done, and vice versa. The healing power of that is just — you can almost watch it happen in a matter of seconds. That there’s this change, this shift, this softness that comes over the faces of these two individuals. It’s so powerful and rewarding.

So I know that it’s very controversial, to put two genders into the same therapy, and to talk about that…We have not had an incident — not one incident — where anybody left the room, feeling that the individual of another gender in that room resulted in them feeling terrified, or resulted in them feeling unsafe or unable to talk…

All of our therapists have to be Masters level. In our child abuse treatment program, and a couple of our other programs, we have Ph.D. levels. And I do personally sit in on all group supervisions…I just want to make sure that the therapists coming in — I want to know what their issues are. I do not want a therapist at that shelter that is coming in with their own garbage, their own baggage regarding male victims. That’s very, very important to me.

[FYI, Carol got married a few years ago and changed her last name--readers might know of her from some of my previous newspaper columns as "Carol Ensign."--GS]

To read all reports from the Conference, please click here.

From Ideology to Inclusion 2009 featured some of the world’s leading experts on domestic violence, many of whom serve on the Editorial Board of the new peer-reviewed academic journal, Partner Abuse, published by Springer Publishing Company. The conference was presented by the California Alliance for Families & Children and co-sponsored by The Family Violence Treatment & Education Association. Some of you may remember that I also wrote extensively about the 2008 conference–to learn more, click here.

I recently attended the excellent Los Angeles domestic violence conference “From Ideology to Inclusion 2009: New Directions in Domestic Violence Research and Intervention.”

The conference featured many domestic violence dissidents–researchers and clinicians who do not believe that the mainstream domestic violence establishment and its “men as perpetrators/women as victims” conceptual framework is properly serving those involved in family violence.

Denise Hines, Ph.D. is a research assistant psychology professor at Clark University and a research associate at the Family Research Laboratory and Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire. At the conference, Dr. Hines detailed her findings on what happens when abused men call domestic violence hotlines or shelters seeking help. About a third of all domestic violence injuries are suffered by men.

Hines’ study included 302 heterosexual men, ages 18 to 59, who had been in a relationship lasting at least one month within the previous year, had been physically assaulted by their female partners within the previous year, and had sought outside assistance/support. The median age of the abused men was 40, and the median age of their abusive female partners was 38. The relationships had lasted on average a little over eight years, and 73% of them had minor children. About two-thirds were married, separated, or divorced.

Of the abused men who called domestic violence hotlines, 64% were told that they “only helped women.” In 32% of the cases, the abused men were referred to batterers’ programs. Another 25% were given a phone number to call that turned out to be a batterers’ program. A little over a quarter of them were given a reference to a local program that helped.

Overall, only 8% of the men who called hotlines classified them as “very helpful,” whereas 69% found them to be “not at all helpful.”

Sixteen percent said the people at the hot line “dismissed or made fun of them.” One abused man said:

They laughed at me and told me I must have done something to deserve it if it happened at all.

Another said:

They asked how much I weighed and how much she weighed and then hung up on me…I was told by this agency that I was full of BS.

Twelve percent of the hotlines accused the man of being the batterer or responsible for the abuse. One abused man said:

They told me women don’t commit domestic violence — it must have been my fault.

Another said:

They accused me of trying to hide my “abuse” of her by claiming to be a victim, and they said that I was nothing more than a wimp.

Of the men who sought help by contacting local domestic violence programs, only 10% found them to be “very helpful,” whereas 65% found them to be “not at all helpful.” One abused man said:

They just laughed and hung up the phone.

Another said:

They didn’t really listen to what I said. They assumed that all abusers are men and said that I must accept that I was the abuser. They ridiculed me for not leaving my wife, ignoring the issues about what I would need to do to protect my six children and care for them.

I’m not surprised by these men’s experiences but my research on this issue gives a somewhat more positive picture of the domestic violence shelters. While preparing for a newspaper column I was doing in 2002 about men being denied services by domestic violence shelters, I decided to check for myself if men were really denied services.

I posed as a male victim of domestic violence and called every domestic violence shelter in all of Los Angeles and San Diego counties. Not a single one would accept me or offer assistance, with the exception of Valley Oasis. Most flatly refused any assistance at all, but a couple did offer me space in a homeless shelter. When I asked, “Am I supposed to take my children to a homeless shelter?”, they replied, “That’s all we can do.”

To their credit, however, several of the shelter directors and workers did sympathize, telling me that we need shelters and services for men, and spending considerable time on the phone with me. While the domestic violence establishment is in general controlled by adherents to the feminist Duluth/’Man-as-Perp/Woman-as-Victim’ model, it’s not a monolith, and there are many unbigoted, well-meaning people within it who would like to see all domestic violence victims served.

To read all reports from the Conference, please click here.

From Ideology to Inclusion 2009 featured some of the world’s leading experts on domestic violence, many of whom serve on the Editorial Board of the new peer-reviewed academic journal, Partner Abuse, published by Springer Publishing Company. The conference was presented by the California Alliance for Families & Children and co-sponsored by The Family Violence Treatment & Education Association. Some of you may remember that I also wrote extensively about the 2008 conference–to learn more, click here.

I recently attended the excellent Los Angeles domestic violence conference “From Ideology to Inclusion 2009: New Directions in Domestic Violence Research and Intervention.”

The conference featured many domestic violence dissidents–researchers and clinicians who do not believe that the mainstream domestic violence establishment and its “men as perpetrators/women as victims” conceptual framework is properly serving those involved in family violence.

Denise Hines, Ph.D. is a research assistant psychology professor at Clark University and a research associate at the Family Research Laboratory and Crimes Against Children Research Center at the University of New Hampshire. At the conference, Dr. Hines detailed her findings on what happens when abused men seek help by calling the police. About a third of all domestic violence injuries are suffered by men.

Hines’ study included 302 heterosexual men, ages 18 to 59, who had been in a relationship lasting at least one month within the previous year, had been physically assaulted by their female partners within the previous year, and had sought outside assistance/support. The median age of the abused men was 40, and the median age of their abusive female partners was 38. The relationships had lasted on average a little over eight years, and 73% of them had minor children. About two-thirds were married, separated, or divorced.

The men in the survey who called the police found them to be “very helpful” in only 19% of cases, and “not at all helpful” in 50% of cases. More importantly, when an abused man called the police, the police were more likely to arrest him than to arrest his abusive female partner. The men who called the police were arrested in 26% of cases, whereas their abusive partners were arrested in only 17%. Half the time the police arrested nobody, despite the abuse, and in 8% of the cases they arrested both the abuser and the victim.

In those cases where the police did identify the abused man’s female partner as the aggressor, in 29% of cases, they refused to arrest the abusive woman. In 39% of these cases they said that there was nothing they could do and left.

One abused man said:

The [police] first response was to arrest me, even after she turned on them, they did nothing.

To read all reports from the Conference, please click here.

From Ideology to Inclusion 2009 featured some of the world’s leading experts on domestic violence, many of whom serve on the Editorial Board of the new peer-reviewed academic journal, Partner Abuse, published by Springer Publishing Company. The conference was presented by the California Alliance for Families & Children and co-sponsored by The Family Violence Treatment & Education Association. Some of you may remember that I also wrote extensively about the 2008 conference–to learn more, click here.

I recently attended the excellent Los Angeles domestic violence conference “From Ideology to Inclusion 2009: New Directions in Domestic Violence Research and Intervention.”

The conference featured many domestic violence dissidents–researchers and clinicians who do not believe that the mainstream domestic violence establishment and its “men as perpetrators/women as victims” conceptual framework is properly serving those involved in family violence.

The Third District Court of Appeal in Sacramento ruled that California’s exclusion of men from domestic violence services violates men’s constitutional equal protection rights in a decision in October. The taxpayer lawsuit — Woods. v. Shewry — was initially filed in 2005 by four male victims of domestic violence. The Court of Appeal held:

“The gender classifications in Health and Safety Code section 124250 and Penal Code section 13823.15, that provide state funding of domestic violence programs that offer services only to women and their children, but not to men, violate equal protection.” To learn more about the lawsuit, click here.

David Woods, a partially-disabled male victim of domestic violence, was the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit. David spoke of the abuse he suffered at the hands of wife Ruth Woods at the From Ideology to Inclusion 2009. He explained:

There was a period of time, in the 90s, the violence — the interaction within our family — was insane…and I started trying to get out. Now, when I was a younger man…I worked construction work, I broke horses on a cattle ranch…I did a lot of physically intensive things….[I ended up with] two fractured vertebrae, and seven herniated discs. Plus multiple fractures to my knee, multiple dislocations to my shoulders. My body was a wreck. I couldn’t go out and hang sheetrock anymore and make, you know, lots of money…I wasn’t able to physically function that way anymore.

The violence really began in our family about 10 days after Ruth realized that she had all the power…I knew I had to get my kids out…I called an agency. It’s the predominant, primary domestic violence shelter agency in Sacramento County…WEAVE: Women Escaping A Violent Environment…I called them and told them what was going on, and they told me that I was a disgusting and repulsive beast to abuse my wife, and call them, and claim that I was the one who needed help. [Weave:] “Men are perpetrators of domestic violence; women are victims of domestic violence.” Click.

I had no way out. I had no money. Ruth insisted — whenever we bought a car — Ruth insisted that the car be in her name only, so that if I took it and went to the movies without her approval she would call the police, tell them and report, “I’m estranged from my husband, and he stole my car.” She did it, several times.

I called and asked for help from WEAVE three different times, and I was given the same answer three different times: “Men are perpetrators of domestic violence, women are victims of domestic violence, you’re a disgusting pig, goodbye.”

When I participated in the “Woods v.” lawsuit, WEAVE was named among the co-defendants. The director of WEAVE emphatically stated that they did provide services to men, they had always provided services to men, they would continue to provide services to men, and that our allegations were a lie. She was either sadly misinformed about how her staff functioned, or she was telling a fib.

The plight of David and his daughter Maegan is detailed in my co-authored column Domestic Violence Lawsuit Will Help Secure Services for All Abuse Victims (Los Angeles Daily Journal, San Francisco Daily Journal, 12/28/05). Maegan told her story in Abused Man’s Daughter Speaks Out–Maegan Talks About Her Childhood. Carol Crabson, Executive Director of the Valley Oasis domestic violence shelter–which has served male victims for 17 years–presented with David, and we’ll also be providing some highlights from her speech in this series.

To read all reports from the Conference, please click here.

From Ideology to Inclusion 2009 featured some of the world’s leading experts on domestic violence, many of whom serve on the Editorial Board of the new peer-reviewed academic journal, Partner Abuse, published by Springer Publishing Company. The conference was presented by the California Alliance for Families & Children and co-sponsored by The Family Violence Treatment & Education Association. Some of you may remember that I also wrote extensively about the 2008 conference–to learn more, click here.

I recently attended the excellent Los Angeles domestic violence conference “From Ideology to Inclusion 2009: New Directions in Domestic Violence Research and Intervention.”

The conference featured many domestic violence dissidents–researchers and clinicians who do not believe that the mainstream domestic violence establishment and its “men as perpetrators/women as victims” conceptual framework is properly serving those involved in family violence.

One of the themes of the conference is that current batterers’ treatment programs are not effective in preventing recidivism amongst domestic violence offenders. It is true that batterers who complete batterers treatment programs often will not re-offend, but that is also true of perpetrators who do not receive batterers’ training. There is a growing consensus among treatment providers that the strategies currently mandated are ineffective, and are placing abused women in harm’s way.

Current treatment strategies are based on the Duluth model, which depicts domestic violence as a function of patriarchy and men’s patriarchal privilege. This model assumes that the reason men physically abuse women is to maintain control over them. In ideologically-driven classes for offenders, men in need of serious psychological intervention are instead screamed at and called “domestic terrorists” and “fascists.”

While some domestic violence no doubt stems from a warped desire to control spouses or intimates, most experts believe that the roots of domestic violence generally lay elsewhere. Psychologist Donald G. Dutton, author of The Abusive Personality: Violence and Control in Intimate Relationships, asserts that personality disorders are the cause of most domestic violence. According to Dutton:

Treatment providers who work with abusive men are very frustrated by the current domestic violence treatment paradigm. Research shows that Duluth-oriented treatments are absolutely ineffective, and have no discernible impact on rates of recidivism. These methods cannot work because they preclude patients from developing the crucial therapeutic bond with their treatment providers. However, when we treat offenders like normal patients by focusing on personality disorders and employing cognitive-behavioral treatments, we see progress.

Lonnie Hazelwood, MSHP, LCDC, CCCJS, who has worked in the domestic violence and chemical dependency fields for over 25 years, discussed this issue at the conference. He said that when counseling abusive men, showing them respect is “an incredibly important part of the program.” He noted:

Nothing makes the therapeutic relationship more difficult than disrespect. Nothing makes the therapeutic relationship more productive than respect.

He criticized the Duluth model for promoting “disrespect” treatment providers for their patients. Hazelwood believes that his methods–which he calls “compassionate confrontation”–have been effective in reducing recidivism amongst domestic violence offenders.

To read all reports from the Conference, please click here.

From Ideology to Inclusion 2009 featured some of the world’s leading experts on domestic violence, many of whom serve on the Editorial Board of the new peer-reviewed academic journal, Partner Abuse, published by Springer Publishing Company. The conference was presented by the California Alliance for Families & Children and co-sponsored by The Family Violence Treatment & Education Association. Some of you may remember that I also wrote extensively about the 2008 conference–to learn more, click here.

I recently attended the excellent Los Angeles domestic violence conference “From Ideology to Inclusion 2009: New Directions in Domestic Violence Research and Intervention.”

The conference featured many domestic violence dissidents–researchers and clinicians who do not believe that the mainstream domestic violence establishment and its “men as perpetrators/women as victims” conceptual framework is properly serving those involved in family violence.

Sandra Stith, Ph.D. does couples counseling for couples who have experienced domestic violence. She says there’s a “partner gap” in domestic violence treatment, because “nobody will deal with violent couples, only men.”

She quotes a female client of hers who tried to get couples counseling for her and her husband. The woman explained:

There isn’t hardly anyone that would take a violent couple…I’ve called and you just get “if he needs counseling called this number”… not even churches. There’s nobody that wants to deal with violent couples. All they want to say is “well how soon do you want a divorce?” Well, I’d really like to try to work it out first.

To read all reports from the Conference, please click here.

From Ideology to Inclusion 2009 featured some of the world’s leading experts on domestic violence, many of whom serve on the Editorial Board of the new peer-reviewed academic journal, Partner Abuse, published by Springer Publishing Company. The conference was presented by the California Alliance for Families & Children and co-sponsored by The Family Violence Treatment & Education Association. Some of you may remember that I also wrote extensively about the 2008 conference–to learn more, click here.