Help: A Practitioners' Perspective On Programmes For Domestic Abuse Perpetrators. A Qualitative Study
| Author | Dr Rebecca Woolford, Dr Julia Wardhaugh |
| Pages | 82-105 |
82
British Journal of Community Justice
©2019 Manchester Metropolitan University
ISSN 1475-0279
Vol. 15(2) 82–105
HELP: A PRACTITIONERS’ PERSPECTIVE ON
PROGRAMMES FOR DOMESTIC ABUSE
PERPETRATORS. A QUALITATIVE STUDY
Dr Rebecca Woolford, Interserve; Dr Julia Wardhaugh, Prifysgol Bangor
Abstract
Domestic abu se perpetrators are a significant proportion of the Probation Services
caseload. Domestic abuse often has long-term problems and generational consequ ences
for chil dren, families and communities in terms of the repetition of abusive and violent
behaviours. In the criminal justice system there are several innovative approaches to
tackling domestic abuse. The newly formed Community Rehabilitation Company (CRC) has
developed HELP as an early programme with the aim of reducing the long -term
consequences of unhealthy relationships. This qualitative study gives an insight into
practitioners’ perspectives on HELP. Firstly, this study strongly suggests that the approach,
delivery and content of HELP are in keeping with the current desistance literature and that
the programme is a positive example of i nnovative, skilled and creative practice. Secondly,
for effective practice with perpetrators of domestic abuse there must be a multi -
dimensional approach, a professional co mmitment and dynamic practice in times of
tremendous change and uncertainty.
Keywords
Programme; domestic abuse; probation; perceptions; qualitative; practitioners
Woolford and Wardhaugh
83
Introduction
It is widely accepted that domestic abuse is perpetrated in many forms and within many
types of relationships (World Health Organization, 2012). Following public
acknowledgement of this significant social and personal problem, it became apparent th at
the behaviour perpetrated by abusive individuals did not take the form of physical violence
alone but included psychological, financial and sexually motivated behaviour. The term
domestic abuse has become widely used, as it encompasses al l behaviours and not solely
violence. The new cross-go vernmental definition of domestic violence and abuse is broad,
covering a range of incidents encompassing differing levels of severity and consequence. In
this study we use this definition to refer to all the above forms of domestic violence and
abuse. However, due to the cohort of people on probation that attend the HELP for
domestic abuse programme, we limit the focus to intimate partner abuse against women.
The official definition is noted below:
Any incident or pattern of incidents of controlling, coercive, threatening
behaviour, violence or abuse between those aged 16 or over who are, or have
been, intimate partners or family members regardless of gender or sexuality.
It can encompass, but is not limited to, the following types of abuse:
psychological, physical, sexual, financial, emotional (Home Office, 2018:6).
Domestic abuse is generally acknowledged to be a far more pervasive problem than
indicated by police reports, and much research has attempted to estimate its true extent
and distribution within the general population. Statistics on domestic abuse are produced
separately by a number of different organisations in England and Wales. It is difficult to
measure the prevalence of domestic abuse; there are many sources of measurement, all of
which have substantial weaknesses. However, the wide range of a vailable sources all point
in the same direction, indicating that domestic abuse is widespread. With the increase in
the identification, conviction and subsequent sentencing of domestic abuse perpetrators in
courts came the emergence of perpetrator programme s in a probation setting (Crawford,
2017). However, women often do not report or disclose domestic abuse to the police (Her
Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary, 2014) and may und er-report domestic abuse in
surveys (Office for National Statistics, 2015).
The evaluation process has helped to inform the evolution of domestic abuse programmes
in the criminal justice system. However, many debates exi st about how e ffectiveness can
be measured. Findings concerning prevalence, causes, cons equences and risks of domestic
abuse vary significantly (Archer, 2000; Buzawa and Buzawa, 2002; DeKeseredy, 2000;
Dobash et al., 1992; Dwyer, 1 999; Johnson and Bunge, 2001; Romkens, 199 7; Tjaden and
Thoennes, 2000). Large-scale general crime surveys do not easily ac commodate fine-
grained exploration and analysis, but local, in-depth studies are more prone to sampling
bias and therefore less representative (Walby and Myhill, 2001). In the past, reconviction
rates for individuals who have completed programmes have been utilised; howe ver, there
are issues to consider in relation to conviction rates for domestic abuse, and the
effectiveness of any programme that aims to positively change behaviour can not be
measured by reconviction rates alone. ‘We cannot be sure of the apparent programme
effect or separate effect of other components. The success of the programme appears to
To continue reading
Request your trial