Can violent, sexually abusive men be successfully 'treated'?
Description
Last month, it was announced that the Home Secretary will allocate £53 million over the next four years to expand Domestic Violence Perpetrator Programmes (DVPPs). These schemes aim to change the behaviour of men who abuse their partners to reduce the risk of further violence. To put this in context, Women's Aid recently announced the closure of its live chat service due to lack of funding, and three Rape Crisis centres have closed in the past year.
Baroness Newlove, Victim Commissioner for England and Wales, welcomed the news, as a clear example of the government’s continued prioritisation of domestic abuse in its forthcoming Violence against Women and Girls Strategy.
However, in my view – as a campaigner against male violence of more than 40 years – this has disaster written all over it.
On the receiving end of this multi-million pound handout is the DRIVE partnership, which was formed in 2015 and comprises organisations that specialise in challenging perpetrators of domestic abuse.
Such perpetrator programmes were imported from the US by well-meaning advocates in the belief that, since many perpetrators are not even reported to the police – let alone brought to court – these initiatives could help hold greater numbers of violent men to account, keeping more women safe via rehabilitation. Sadly, there is little to no credible evidence that men do change as a result of these courses (except perhaps in the short term – until their wives and partners accept the “I will change” mantra and agree to take them back).
Ciara Bergman, CEO of Rape Crisis England & Wales has expressed serious concerns about the lack of support for victims of male violence. She points out that many women are lulled into a false sense of security when men use new tactics that have inadvertently been provided to them by naive course facilitators. They have learnt the “right things” to say to convince their victims that they no longer pose a threat.
An evaluation of DRIVE published earlier this year showed that there was a greater reduction in sexual abuse in the control group of men not having undergone the course than there was among those who had. Let that sink in: those who complete this course are more likely to abuse women than those who don’t. Additionally, the DRIVE programme has no expertise in working with men who specifically commit acts of sexual violence.
Research by feminist academics, published a decade ago, found that ninety per cent of the men interviewed had, prior to the course, made excuses for and attempted to justify their abusive behaviour. After the course, this tendency had barely reduced at all – almost three-quarters of the men were still making excuses. Over half of the women reported still feeling fearful after their abuser had completed the course. The research also found that after attendance, most of the men continued to control household finances and monitor the women’s behaviour – their own behaviour having changed “only marginally”.
Those running perpetrator programmes in the UK originally insisted that there must be support for the victim available at the same time that the abuser is on the programme. But with £53 million coming in for the men, and nothing for their female victims, that principle is long gone. No wonder many victims and survivors of domestic abuse refused to endorse what they saw as a get-out-of-jail-free giveaway, in the form of these “treatment programmes”.
Supporters of the DVPP approach claim it is not a replacement for the long arm of the law. But the facts and figures speak for themselves. Research clearly shows that prosecutions for such offences are at an all-time low – even though the number of men offered places on DVPPs has increased significantly.
After talking to victims, probation officers and those running DVPPs, I am convinced that most of the time, these programmes achieve little – beyond helping violent men avoid time in prison.
But groups such as Sisters Uncut, that claim to be feminist but are anything but, are prison abolitionists, arguing that no-one, however dangerous, should ever be in prison because it is a ‘tool of the state’. I would empty both men and women’s prisons of pretty much all those that do not pose a danger to other humans or animals, but what do these women propose we do with the men that rape and kill women? Put them in a ‘trust circle’ and ask them to speak about their pain?
A Sisters Uncut demonstration, London
The money and effort spent trying to get men who are already extremely violent towards women to change their ways is wasted. What they need is a short sharp shock, to be removed from the home, arrested – and charged, so that there is a record of their potential danger to other women.
These men “talk the talk” and “walk the walk”, convincing therapists and/or trainers that they have seen the light and will be “good boys” from now on. The women want to believe it – but because the men are neither taken away by police nor scared by being locked up for a couple of weeks – it soon starts all over again.
