Caring about men and boys. This episode briefly introduces and begins to critique the long serving domestic abuse intervention, the Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme, based on the American Duluth model; both UK and US programmes are underpinned with radical feminist ideology and claim a single cause for domestic abuse, that of sexism. This introduction discusses the harm that can be caused by a one cause, one remedy intervention, which is blind to a wide range of other non-political factors which may contribute to a person, male or female, being abusive. And of course, there’s a good guy of the week!
Caring about men and boys. This episode briefly introduces and begins to critique the long serving domestic abuse intervention, the Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme, based on the American Duluth model; both UK and US programmes are underpinned with radical feminist ideology and claim a single cause for domestic abuse, that of sexism. This introduction discusses the harm that can be caused by a one cause, one remedy intervention, which is blind to a wide range of other non-political factors which may contribute to a person, male or female, being abusive. And of course, there’s a good guy of the week!
Men Being Treated Badly: The Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme: Part 1
This is a huge topic and I expect to return to it in several episodes. Please accept this as a brief introduction which gives a flavour of the UK domestic abuse programme which I have to say up front was replaced but as we shall see in future episodes, similarities remain even in the new intervention.
As I say in my introduction, I am concerned about men being thought of, and treated, badly and this has influenced my work significantly as a psychotherapist, particularly around men’s treatment in the domestic abuse arena. I have been working with men and women’s rage issues, in roughly equal proportions, for over 20 years; I began to develop my models and methodology for working with rage issues in an effort to directly challenge the mainstream intervention for domestic abuse at that time, the model I discuss here.
In my early career I began to work with men who were referred to me because they were not thriving on the probation service’s Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme, which I’ll call IDAP from now on; IDAP is a British intervention, based on the Duluth model from the United States, both of which were underpinned by radical feminist ideology.
In later years I have also interviewed men about their IDAP experiences in a way that gained important information for me but also I hope gave them a chance to debrief and process some of the trauma they had experienced on the programme.
The Duluth model originated in the 1980’s, in Duluth, Minnesota. The intervention conceptualised domestic abuse as an exclusively male on female behaviour, caused by men’s socialisation into a patriarchal system, patriarchy is defined as, ‘a system of society in which men hold the power and women are largely excluded from it’. The radical feminist narrative goes, men learn how to be men through being socialised into a patriarchal system which favours them, gives them a sense of superiority and entitlement and permission to intimidate and bully to get their needs met. So, within this programme, the acting out of rage is perceived as the socially learned behaviour of men who have sexist expectations and attitudes, they are simply reflecting a culture that teaches men to dominate. Rage is constructed as a power issue, involving attempts to exert control, expressions of expectations of entitlement or a belief in a licence to punish others for perceived wrongdoing.
The IDAP is a ‘one-size-fits-all’ re-education programme which aims to help men who have been convicted of domestic abuse to change their sexist beliefs, to modify their abusive behaviour and to learn how to be mutually co-operative with others, good aims indeed.
It focuses on the Duluth power and control wheel which comprises two circular maps, one wheel, the abuse wheel identifies eight abusive behaviours, the other identifies eight replacement non-abusive behaviours. The eight categories of the abuse wheel are
1. using coercions and threats
2. using intimidation
3. using emotional abuse
4. using isolation
5. minimising denial and blaming
6. using children
7. using male privilege
8. using economic abuse
It is the intention of the programme to replace these eight abusive behaviours with the eight respectful and non-abusive behaviours which sit on the non-abuse wheel; they are
1. negotiation and fairness
2. non-threatening behaviour
3. respect
4. trust and support
5. honesty and accountability
6. responsible parenting
7. shared responsibility
8. economic partnership
All extremely good qualities.
The abuse wheel reminds participants of their responsibility for reducing abusive behaviours and the non-abuse wheel offers alternative solutions to the conflict. Programme members and usually two facilitators, a male and a female, constitute a community to help participants identify their abusive behaviours and to challenge them to change.
The IDAP perspective on partner abuse polarises the sexes, one partner in a relationship is a victim of it and the other is a perpetrator; through this lens, the victim is female and the perpetrator is male, domestic abuse is a gender issue, not a human issue. So, within this model, there is only one cause of domestic abuse, that is, men holding sexist beliefs, and only one solution, their re-education, in the form of being indoctrinated into radical feminist ideology; it’s a political solution, not a therapeutic one.
This narrow-minded conceptualisation, that every act of domestic abuse is universally caused by men holding sexist beliefs, is blind to a whole host of issues which are much more likely to contribute to harmful behaviours in relationships than the single cause of patriarchy.
I’m grumpy that I even have to say this, but I know I do, giving consideration here to other issues that may cause a person to behave abusively is not an excuse for that behaviour, it is an explanation for it. Abusive behaviour is not OK and whatever the reason for behaving in this way, a person who is abusive must take responsibility for that behaviour and take steps to change it. However, if a wider set of issues are taken into account, it can be seen that programmes like IDAP may not be the most effective form of help.
So, let’s look at what IDAP may be blind to
· firstly, framing domestic abuse as a simple, ‘one person’ issue rather than as a relational or systemic issue, ignores the more complex often messy, co-created reality of a couple’s relationship dynamics; it also ignores a host of university research that has found the majority of domestic abuse to be symmetrical rather than asymmetrical, that is co-created in equal measure by two people
· traumatic brain injuries, TBI are not taken into account; according to the prisons and probation page of the gov.uk website, having a TBI raises the likelihood of committing crime for both men and women, it doubles the risk of committing more serious forms of crime and people with more than one TBI have higher rates of criminality. Astoundingly, around 50% or more people in prisons may have experienced a TBI, compared to less than 10% of people in the general population
· a person’s individual and familial history may have a very significant impact on their behaviour and it may be helpful to explore this; it’s my experience that most people with rage issues tend to come from backgrounds that were not as caring as they could have been.
· linked to this, developmental trauma caused by inadequate parenting may impact strongly and is a prime cause of rage behaviours; 97% of the people I work with who come for help with rage issues did not have the appropriate psychological support as children
· people may have experienced more general trauma, trauma that has been caused by life’s events; in my opinion, rage is a trauma related behaviour, it is an unconscious defence mechanism which gets activated when a person is overwhelmed and cannot manage their psychological experience; because it is unconscious, it cannot be addressed with cognitive, educative interventions. A deeper process which addresses the unique underlying causes of a person’s abusive behaviour is required; and I am of the opinion that it is unethical and abusive to assume that abuse is deliberate, calculated and conscious behaviour intended to control and intimidate a chosen female target. There are indeed psychopaths amongst us in the population who are consciously duplicitous, manipulative and violent, but these account for a tiny 1% of the population and many of them, unlike the majority of men whom I have worked with, function very well in the world, their lack of a conscience or empathy and inflated self-image have enabled them to ruthlessly manoeuvre and manipulate themselves into high powered positions. The men on IDAP programmes are not scheming psychopaths on the whole but traumatised individuals.
· mental health issues are important to consider such as a person having Antisocial, Borderline or Narcissistic personality traits which if they were identified could be sensitively addressed
· exploring the bigger context of a rage event that lands a man on the IDAP programme, could be helpful; by taking the attention beyond the ‘snap-shot offence moment’ important information could be yielded which may be helpful in a more holistic approach
· and lastly, and very significantly, considering a person’s alcohol and drug use is important. In 2006, the World Health Organisation published a report entitled ‘Intimate Partner Violence and Alcohol’ which reported finding that, in the United States of America, and in England and Wales, victims told researchers that their partners had been drinking prior to a physical assault in 55% of cases in the us and 32% of cases in England and wales.
All Food for thought.
I am going to return to this issue several times I think, there’s so much more to talk about. Suffice it to say here, it’s my belief that the IDAP programme has done much more harm than good to many men who have participated in it and cannot in any sense be deemed therapeutic.
Good guy of the week
Working as a delivery driver can be exhausting. In all weather conditions, climbing in and out of your van, loading and unloading it, and going door to door can be quite a challenge and exhausting by the end of the day. Nothing can hold back those deliveries.
During this week I came across a video where a FedEx delivery driver finds a moment of fun during his busy schedule. The footage was captured on the CCTV of one of the people he delivered to.
In this video, you see the delivery driver arrive at his destination safely. He gets out of the van with his package in his arms and as he walks up the driveway, he spots something on the ground.
The homeowner’s children had drawn a hopscotch game with chalk. Like most adults, me included, I’m sure he wasn’t able to resist, he couldn’t help but hop, skip and jump.
It brought a lot of joy too to the house owner who spotted the delivery man playing his game of hopscotch, it made him smile, and as he answered the door to a slightly embarrassed delivery man, said “it’s nice to see somebody enjoying their day”.
And now, we can all enjoy seeing the FedEx man forgetting his age and playing hopscotch on youtube, just put ‘delivery driver’ and ‘hopscotch’ in your search engine and Voila! What a great guy!