Types of Domestic Violence - PowerPoint Presentation

Types of Domestic ViolenceResearch Evidence Michael P. Johnson, Ph.D.Sociology, Women's Studies, and African & African American Studies Penn State Photos from Donna Ferrato, Living with the Enemy. New York: Aperture, 1991 McKeesport, PA Catholic Family Services of Peel Dufferin June 3, 2010

The Continuing Gender Debate Anti-feminist politics and conflicting dataExplaining the ostensible contradictionsA Control-based Typology of Partner ViolenceThe three major types (plus one or two) Gender differences and sampling biases Dramatic Differences Among the TypesViolence severity, frequency, mutuality, and escalationHealth consequencesRelationship consequencesMiscellaneous other major differences Preview of Policy Implications Screening, Primary prevention/education, Intervention with perpetrators, Intervention for survivors, Law enforcement issues, Custody and access issues

The Anti-feminist Backlash The Men’s Project. February 2009. Submission to Ontario Ministry of the Attorney General…the Ontario Government may be in violation of their obligations… [because] the existing network of shelters for victims of family violence exclude men….Pittsburgh Post Gazette July 26, 2009Feminist ideologues ignore research that shows domestic violence is just as often started by women as by menGlobe and Mail July 27, 2002 (Web site) Men as likely to suffer spousal abuse, Statscan says.

Heterosexual intimate partner violence by gender Data Source Men Women U.S., NFVS, 1975—the beginning 51% 49% U.S., NSFH, 1988 53%47%North Carolina, 8th & 9th Grade, 199435%65%U. of Maine, students, 199739%61%New Zealand, young adults, 200239%61%Canada, GSS, 200454%46% General Surveys Indicate That Women Are as Violent as Men

But Agency Studies Indicate ThatMen Are the Batterers Heterosexual intimate partner violence by gender Data Source Men Women Cleveland, Divorce Court, 1966 92% 8% Ontario, Family Court, 198294%6%Santa Barbara, CA, Police, 198394%6%U.K., Emergency Rooms, 198883%17%U.S., FBI, 1996-200175%25%Canada, Spousal Homicide, 1995-200582%18%

A Small TheorythatReconciles the Contradiction There is more than one type of partner violenceThe different types are differently genderedBoth major sampling plans are biasedGeneral survey studies are biased toward situationally-provoked violence, which women are as likely to perpetrate as are menAgency studies are biased toward coercive controlling violence, perpetrated almost entirely by men

The Continuing Gender Debate Anti-feminist politics and conflicting dataExplaining the ostensible contradictionsA Control-based Typology of Partner Violence The three major types (plus one or two)Gender differences and sampling biases Dramatic Differences Among the TypesViolence severity, frequency, mutuality, and escalationHealth consequencesRelationship consequences Miscellaneous other major differencesPreview of Policy Implications Screening, Primary prevention/education, Intervention with perpetrators, Intervention for survivors, Law enforcement issues, Custody and access issues

Intimate Terrorism Coercive Control Violent Resistance Resisting the Intimate TerroristSituational Couple Violence Situationally-provoked Violence Mutual Violent Control Two Intimate Terrorists Separation-instigated Violence No History of Violence or Control

Domestic Violence/Intimate Terrorism Two major subtypes: (a) Emotionally dependent; (b) Antisocial

Coercive Control Scale Thinking about your husband [yourself], would you say he [you]… is jealous or possessive? tries to provoke arguments? tries to limit your contact with family and friends? insists on knowing who you are with at all times? calls you names or puts you down in front of others? makes you feel inadequate? shouts or swears at you? frightens you? prevents you from knowing about or having access to the family income even when you ask? *These are items from the 1995 National Violence Against Women Survey (Tjaden & Thoennes , 1998 ). They were adapted from the Canadian Violence Against Women Survey (Holly Johnson, 1996).

Gender Symmetry/Asymmetryby Type of Violence (1970s Pittsburgh: Violent husbands and wives) Husbands Wives N Intimate terrorism 97% 3% 97 Violent resistance4%96%77Situational couple violence56%44%1462000s Britain: IT 87% male; VR 10% male; SCV 45% male

The Biases of Major Sampling Plans(Violent men: Pittsburgh*) General Sample (n = 37) Court Sample (n = 34) Shelter Sample (n = 50)Intimate terrorism14%68%78%Violent resistance0%0%2%Situational couple violence86%29%18%*The pattern is essentially the same for the British research.

The Continuing Gender Debate Anti-feminist politics and conflicting dataExplaining the ostensible contradictionsA Control-based Typology of Partner Violence The three major types (plus one or two) Gender differences and sampling biasesDramatic Differences Among the TypesViolence severity, frequency, mutuality, and escalationHealth consequencesRelationship consequences Miscellaneous other major differencesPreview of Policy Implications Screening, Primary prevention/education, Intervention with perpetrators, Intervention for survivors, Law enforcement issues, Custody and access issues

Intimate Terrorism Situational Couple Violence 76% severe 75% escalated 29% mutual 28% severe 28% escalated 69% mutual General Motive: To control the relationship Situational Motive: To win, get attention, get even, etc .1/25 couples1/8 couplesPittsburgh dataMixed sample

Intimate Terrorism Situational Couple Violence 43% severe 78% escalated 15% mutual 13% severe 20% escalated 87% mutual General Motive: To control the relationship Situational Motive: To win, get attention, get even, etc British dataMixed sample

Intimate Terrorism Situational Couple Violence 41% frequent violence 56% feared for life 8% frequent violence 17% feared for life General Motive: To control the relationship Situational Motive: To win, get attention, get even, etc Canadian GSS 1999Previous partner

Intimate Terrorism Situational Couple Violence 57% frequent violence 60% feared for life 8% frequent violence 9% feared for life General Motive: To control the relationship Situational Motive: To win, get attention, get even, etc Canadian GSS 2004Previous/current partner

Women’s Health Outcomes by Type of Male Violence SCV IT Any Injury Pittsburgh 56% 94% *** U.S., NVAW 13%32%***Severe injuryPittsburgh28%76%***U.S., NVAW2%5%*General healthChicago Good to Very Good Fair to Good * Post-traumatic stress + U.S., NVAW 37% 79% *** + Percent above the median for female victims of partner violence *.05 **.01 ***.001

Relationship Outcomes by Type of Male Violence Situational Couple Violence Intimate Terrorism Low marital happiness Pittsburgh 13% 50%***Left more than oncePittsburgh26%74%***U.S., NVAW7%29%***Rarely a good time Pittsburgh3%20%*** Sex often unpleasant Pittsburgh 9% 23% *** ***.001

Need to Re-assess EverythingVarious studies by Various Social Scientists Intergenerational “transmission”SCV d = .11; IT d = .35SCV odds ratio = 2.40; IT odds ratio = 7.51MarriageSCV b = -.62; IT b = .58 Gender traditionalism or hostility toward womenTraditionalism: SCV d = -.14; IT d = .80Hostility: non-viol., SCV, IT, IT = 154, 153, 135, 131 Gender, frequency, severity, escalation, mutuality, impact on victim, impact on children, etc.

The Continuing Gender Debate Anti-feminist politics and conflicting dataExplaining the ostensible contradictions A Control-based Typology of Partner ViolenceThe three major types (plus one or two) Gender differences and sampling biasesDramatic Differences Among the TypesViolence severity, frequency, mutuality, and escalationHealth consequences Relationship consequencesMiscellaneous other major differences Preview of Policy Implications Screening, Primary prevention/education, Intervention with perpetrators, Intervention for survivors, Law enforcement issues, Custody and access issues

Preview of Policy Implications ScreeningPrimary prevention/education Intervention with perpetrators Intervention for survivorsLaw enforcementCustody and access issues

We make big mistakes if we don’t make big distinctions. Different types of partner violence have…Different causesDifferent developmental trajectoriesDifferent effectsDifferent successful intervention strategies

Support Your Local Women’s Shelter SafetySupportInformationAdvocacy Philadelphia, PA shelter Photos from Donna Ferrato, Living with the Enemy. New York: Aperture, 1991

Screening/Triage Different models for different clientsTo screen we need information on control and violence for both membersSafety first!Initially assume the worst (intimate terrorism)If SCV seems likely, try individual application of other approachesIf SCV and safety become clear, move to couple approaches with protections in place

Primary Prevention/Education You’re the expertsIntimate terrorismEquality and respectViolent resistanceDangers of violent resistance Safety planningEntrapment/escape issues Situational couple violenceSources of conflictAnger management tacticsCommunicationSubstance abuse

Intervention with Perpetrators Hold them all accountable in the criminal justice systemto provide an essential motivation for changeIntimate terrorismControl-focused education Perhaps different tactics for sub-typesViolent resistance Alternatives to violence/Safety planningNeutralize entrapmentSituational couple violenceSources of conflictAnger managementCommunication counseling Substance abuse rehab

Intervention with Perpetrators SCV Dependent IT Antisocial IT Completed Program 77% 38% 9%Re-arrest18%38%46%Repeat Violence55%62%88%Outcomes of Duluth-type Batterer Intervention Program (Thirteen Months Post-adjudication)Eckhardt et al., 2008

Differential Success of Intervention Strategies by IT Sub-type(Percent non-violent two years after completing treatment) Dependent Antisocial Feminist cognitive-behavioral 48% 65% Process-psychodynamic 67% 49% Adapted from Saunders (1996)

Intervention for Survivors Intimate terrorism Long-term supportAlternatives to violent resistanceEmpowerment to leaveTransitional supportSituational couple violence Source of conflictAnger managementCommunication counselingSubstance abuse rehab

Custody and Access Issues Separation-instigated violenceManipulative accusationsResources for thorough evaluationCustody/access optionsJoint custody/Co-parentingParallel parenting, minimal couple contactSupervised exchangesSupervised accessNo contact

Pittsburgh, 1978 (Frieze) Married women from shelters and courts, matched with married women living on the same block (n=272) 86% White; 14% Black Data on self and husband, reported by wives Incident data on most violent incidentUnited States, 1995-96 (NVAW, Tjaden & Thoennes) National random sample; subsample=4967 married women 83% White; 10% Black; 8% Hispanic (all races) Data on current husbands, reported by wife Incident data on most recent incidentChicago, 1995 (Lloyd) Random sample of women in a poor neighborhood (n=596) 5% White; 54% Black; 41% Hispanic Data on male partners, reported by female partner No incident data

Pittsburgh Control Scale (High>2.74; 40%m; 10%w) When you and your husband go places together, who decides where you will go?If you disagree [about people you like], which people do the two of you spend more time with?Does your husband know where you are when you are not together?Are there places you might like to go but don’t because you feel your husband wouldn’t want you to? How often does this happen?Do you generally do what your husband asks you to do? Who decides how the family money will be spent in terms of major expenses?[How often} does he try to get what he wants by doing any of the following?…emotionally withdraws? …restricts your freedom?…stops having sex with you?…threatens to leave you?Has your husband ever pressured you to have sexual relations?

Pittsburgh: Other Items “Has your husband ever gotten angry and threatened to use physical force with you?” followed by the item that is actually used: Has he ever actually slapped or pushed you or used other physical force with you?Can you estimate how many times, in total, he was violent with you?Did he become more violent over time?How badly were you hurt [the time your husband was most violent with you]? Frieze codes: severe, severe superficial, severe trauma, and extreme permanent. Were you afraid he would be violent again? Already “very frightened” at the first violent incident.How would you rate the happiness of your marriage on a scale from 1-Not at all to 10-Very happy? Low=1-4, 32%Is sex ever unpleasant for you? Do you and your husband have a good time when you go out together?

Chicago Items Control Items: In the past 12 months, when you’ve had an argument, how often did your husband/boyfriend……say something to spite you? ...insult you, swear at you, or call you out of your name? ...accuse you of being with another man?...try to control your every move?...withhold money, make you ask for money or take yours?…threaten you with a knife or gun? ...threaten to kill you?...threaten to hurt your family or friends?

Intimate Terrorism Situational Couple Violence 67% severe 72% escalated 37% mutual 29% severe 29% escalated 74% mutual General Motive: To control the relationship Specific Motive: To win, get attention, get even, etc.1/25 couples1/8 couplesPittsburgh-cutoff

NVAWS Control Scale(High = 3 or more) “Thinking about your current husband, would you say he is jealous or possessive?”“…tries to limit your contact with family and friends?” “…insists on knowing who you are with at all times?”“…calls you names or puts you down in front of others?” “…makes you feel inadequate?”“…shouts or swears at you?”“…prevents you from knowing about or having access to the family income even when you ask?” -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------“…insists on changing residences even when you don’t want or need to?”“…prevents you from working outside the home?”

Control Scale “Thinking about your current husband, would you say he is jealous or possessive?”“…tries to limit your contact with family and friends?”“…insists on knowing who you are with at all times?” “…calls you names or puts you down in front of others?”“…makes you feel inadequate?” “…shouts or swears at you?”“…prevents you from knowing about or having access to the family income even when you ask?” NVAWS

The Great Gender Debate Distinguishing among types of partner violence resolves itA Control-based Typology of Partner ViolenceThe three major typesGender differences and sampling biases Other differencesImplications for Research and Theory Everything we “know” has to be re-assessedNeed a standard operationalizationTricky sampling problemsNeed for differentiated theory Implications for InterventionScreening/triage Intervention with perpetrators Intervention for survivors Custody and access issues

Table 2: Ex-Spouse Violence by Gender Violence Type Intimate Terrorism Situational Couple Violence Non-violent (n) Ex-husband 22.0% 7.4% 70.5%(2413)Ex-wife5.4%3.9%90.7%(2051)

The Great Gender Debate Distinguishing among types of partner violence resolves itA Control-based Typology of Partner ViolenceThe three major types Gender differences and sampling biasesOther differences Implications for Research and TheoryEverything we “know” has to be re-assessedNeed a standard operationalizationTricky sampling problemsNeed for differentiated theory Implications for InterventionScreening/triage Intervention with perpetrators Intervention for survivors Custody and access issues

Need a Standard Operationalization Problems with cluster analysisExtremely sensitive to sampleNot comparable across studies Need a standard operationalizationNVAWS items Tolman: Psychological Maltreatment of Women InventoryGraham-Kevan & Archer: Controlling Behaviors Scale Dutton & Goodman: Coercive control

Need for Differentiated Theory Intimate terrorismCoercive control theoryGender theoryTheories of paternalismViolent ResistanceCopingEntrapmentSituational couple violenceFamily conflict theoryCommunication Anger management Substance abuse

The Great Gender Debate Distinguishing among types of partner violence resolves itA Control-based Typology of Partner ViolenceThe three major typesGender differences and sampling biases Other differences Implications for Research and TheoryEverything we “know” has to be re-assessedNeed a standard operationalizationTricky sampling problems Need for differentiated theoryImplications for InterventionScreening/triage Intervention with perpetrators Intervention for survivors Custody and access issues

A Control-based Typology of Partner Violence The three major types (plus one or two)Gender differences and sampling biases Some other basic differences We need to re-assess everything we thought we knewImplications for Intervention Screening/triagePrimary prevention/educationIntervention with perpetrators Intervention for survivors Custody and access issues

Sampling Problem: General SurveysCurrent Spouses-NVAWS Felson & Outlaw, 2007

Sampling Solution: General SurveysFormer Spouses-NVAWS Felson & Outlaw, 2007

Spousal Violence Type by Gender General Survey Data Intimate Terrorism Situational Couple Violence Non-violent (n) Husband 0.7% 3.9% 95.3%(4846)Wife0.5%1.7%97.9%(5126)Ex-husband22.0%7.4%70.5%(2413)Ex-wife5.4% 3.9% 90.7% (2051) Data from NVAWS, Johnson, Leone, & Xu, 2008

The Continuing Gender Debate A Control-based Typology of Partner Violence Dramatic Differences Among the Types Preview of Policy Implications Types of Domestic Violence Research Evidence