Understanding the DV
Offender: The Connection
between
Risk and Motive
Dorthy Stucky Halley
Director Of Victim Services
Michelle McCormick
BIP Coordinator
“Nothing is easier than to denounce the
evildoer; nothing is more difficult than
to understand him.”
― Fyodor Dostoyevsky
Defining Domestic
Violence in Batterer
Intervention Programs
• KSA 21-5111: “Domestic violence” means an act or
threatened act of violence against a person with whom the
offender is involved or has been involved in a dating
relationship, or an act or threatened act of violence against a
family or household member by a family or household
member. Domestic violence also includes any other crime
committed against a person or against property, or any
municipal ordinance violation against a person or against
property, when directed against a person with whom the
offender is involved or has been involved in a dating
relationship or when directed against a family or household
member by a family or household member.
• BIP: A pattern of abusive and coercive behavior used to
dominate and control an intimate partner or former intimate
partner, (or household/family member).
“Offender”
• “Batterer”, “Abuser”, “Domestic
Violence Offender”…Not all
persons convicted of a
domestic violence offense are
batterers.
– Situational violence
– Resistive violence
– Self-defense
– Battering
Battering Behaviors
Commonly Charged
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Domestic battery
Battery
Agg. Battery
Assault
Agg. Assault
Criminal Threat
Kidnapping
Agg. Kidnapping
• Arson
• Criminal damage to
property
• Criminal trespass
• Violation of Protection
Order
• Sexual Battery
• Rape
• Burglary
• Stalking
Other Common
Battering Behaviors
• Threats to commit
suicide if they leave
• Causing fear by
looks, actions,
gestures
• Put down’s, name
calling, mind games
• Using the children
• Controlling who they
see, where they go, etc
• Using jealousy to justify
actions
• Minimizing, denying,
blaming others for their
abuse
• Preventing access to
money or ability to earn
money
Do Batterers…
• Have the same characteristics?
• Respond similarly to the same type of
intervention?
• Have the same motivation?
• Need the same safeguards put in place?
Differences…
• Some victims describe:
– cyclical relationship where violence has been minimal
and remained minimal
– sadism and merciless torture
– their partner believes they have every right to be
violent if he/she fails to please them
– abuse as an extension of some other problem; a
serious mental illness, a head injury, or drug/alcohol
addiction*
Understanding the
Differences
• Psychologically & Sociologically based
perspectives
– Object Relations/Ego Development
• Attachment Issues
– Social Learning
– Feminist
• Criminal Justice
– Incident based
– Motive?
Categorizing Batterers
 Early typologies were based on pathology
 Have different clusters, with a separate cluster for
“family-only”.
 Did not uphold when examined with rigorous
research.
 While some batterers have mental illness, the
ratio is about 15% more than the average
public.
 Categories reflect the researcher’s frame of
reference, but not necessarily the situation or
subjects before them.
Application of Motive
• Growing consensus that current efforts have
not led to distinct enough categories.
– “Researchers and clinicians cannot predict which
men in the less severely violent groups will
escalate their violence.” (Holtzworth-Munroe,
2000)
– Some researchers are now pointing to a new
area that needs consideration: motive.
A Case for Consideration
of Motive
• Some parallels between
sexual assault and DV.
• Use of motive typology
for SO’s has been found
to have reliability and
validity
• Pioneered by FBI-BSU
(serial rapists)
• Relies strongly on victim
information
Different Motives for
Aggression
• “People aggress for a variety of reasons. Some resort to
force to appropriate tangible resources they desire.
• Some behave aggressively because it wins them
approval and status rewards.
• Still others may rely on aggressive conquests to bolster
their self-esteem and manliness.
• And some may derive satisfaction from seeing the
expressions of suffering they inflict on their victims…”
• —Bandura, 1973, p. 184. (emphasis added)
Understanding Different
Types of Batterers
• Different Motives
• Different Behaviors
• Different Dangers
All batterers seek to dominate and control
their victim. Why they want to dominate
and control, however, is quite different.
The Application of Motive
Survival-based
Entitlement-based
Sadistic-based
(D. Stucky Halley)
Survival-Based Batterer
• Motivation related to survival needs.
– Must have their partner in order to survive
– Reaction to loss is not of fear, but terror
– Sense of betrayal is not normal anger, but rage
– Fits Walker’s description: strong cycle of abuse
– Much of Dutton’s “abusive personality” structure
fits
Characteristics
• Borderline Tendencies; (not necessarily disorder)
• Kaplan (Object Relations Theory):
– Incapable of holding partner image of strengths
and weaknesses.
– Must view as perfect human being:
• fully capable of making him whole
• angelic in her very being
• next breath views her as nothing more than the worst,
most despicable human being that ever existed.
– Aloof, narcissistic, and has a need for partner to
sustain their thirst for self-perfection.
Characteristics, cont’d.
– Becomes terrified of both separation and
closeness
– Projects into all intimate relationships;
• Searches for perfect partner; rages when
that perception fails. Then fears losing the
relationship and is remorseful. Puts partner
back on pedestal. Creates self-fulfilling
prophecy.
Dutton
• Describes “cyclical or emotionally volatile
batterers”
– 5 biggest childhood contributors to wife assault,
ranked in order of importance
1. Being shamed by their father
2. Being rejected/abandoned by their father
3. Being physically abused by their father
4. Being verbally abused by their father
5. Feeling rejected by their mother
Dutton, cont’d.
• Dutton believes most dangerous
– research indicates these are the batterers most
dangerous during or after separation;
– “antisocial” batterers could be most dangerous
during the relationship (Saunders & Hamill, 2003)
Survival-based Who Kill:
(David Adams 2007)
• “…combination of anger toward her and
self-loathing…he said he frequently felt
inferior… (p.90)
• “…suicide threats, quitting his job, cashing
out his retirement…someone who’d
decided he had little to live for…” (p. 4)
Protection Orders
• Violation rates of 60% within the year of
the final PFA.
– Those with high stake in conformity and not
survival based most likely to be deterred.
• Victims should be given opportunity to
obtain protective orders but should not be
pressured to do so. Protection Orders can
heighten danger in some cases (survivalbased).
Entitlement-based
Batterer
• Motivation is based on privilege
– If things don’t go his/her way, believes they
have the right to punish
– Behavior is quite calculated, evidence of
someone in absolute control rather than being
“out of control” with anger
– If cyclical, less genuine in remorse
– Some fake anger, or have “righteous” anger
– Likely to get more severe w/o accountability
– Fits well with feminist perspective and social
learning theory
Subtype:
Materially Motivated
(Adams)
• Primary interest is money and material assets
• None had even normal degrees of jealousy
• Some exploitive:
– View women as interchangeable and disposable
• Some possessive:
– Embittered about division of property
• If monitoring their partner, it is to know her plans
• Expectation of services from their partner (sexual
intimacy, emotional support, companionship,
housework, care of children) without assuming any
reciprocal responsibilities.
Subtype:
Materially Motivated, II
• Contempt for their partner
– Could not think of a positive attribute of partner
• View women as restrictors of their liberty
– Lack empathy & remorse
– Manipulative, exploitive
– Shallow emotions
• Some are career criminals
• Victims rarely contact police
• Make victims drug dependent, then threatens to cut
her off.
• Might also force them into prostitution.
Learned Behaviors and
Choosing Violence
• Provides an
understanding regarding
batterers that do not
“cycle”;
• Merges social learning
theory and feminist theory
– In DV, violence is selective,
they make some choice,
they are violent when it
benefits them
– Learned male privilege and
learned attitudes toward
women must be addressed
to stop violence
• “People therefore attack
not only those whom they
have learned to dislike,
but also those whom it is
relatively safe to attack
and those whom it is
advantageous to attack”
- Bandura
Sadistic –Based Batterers
• Motivated by the pleasure received through
causing another’s pain
• Most intelligent
• Usually have considerable power on the job
• Often does not begin abuse until long after the
marriage began
• Masterful at hiding abuse from family/friends
• Victimization first noted when victims enter
psych units
Sexual Sadists
•
•
•
•
Roy Hazelwood: extensive research
Kills women who resemble his mother
Fantasies never end
Physically, emotionally, or psychologically
severely abused as a child
• “Triad”
– Set fires
– Hurt Pets
– Bed-wetting
Motive Continuum
• Not always distinct
categories,
• Can carry a wide
range of differences,
• Knowing the
batterer’s motive is
just one aspect of
responding to the risk.
Entitlement
Survival
Sadistic
Victim Motive?
•
•
•
•
Why doesn’t she just leave?
Why do you keep violating your PFA?
Why do you go back/let him back in?
Why do I have to keep coming out
here?
• Why are you asking for the charges to
be dropped?
Victim Motivation
• Context Matters!
• “Why doesn’t she just leave?”
Barriers to Victim Safety
Example of the context
Risk and
Lethality
PRIOR PHYSICAL ABUSE & STALKING
EXPERIENCED ONE YEAR PRIOR TO FEMICIDE
(N=311) & ATTEMPTED FEMICIDE (N=182)
Femicide Attempted
• Prior physical abuse………...…. 70%
– Increased in frequency……..…. 66%
– Increased in severity…….…. 62%
– Stalked …………………........ 87%
• No prior physical abuse…….…. 30%
– Stalked……………………..… 58%
72%
54%
60%
95%
28%
72%
DA COMPARISON: ACTUAL & ATTEMPTED
FEMICIDE SURVIVORS (N=493) & ABUSED
CONTROLS (N=427)
Att/Actual
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Physical violence inc. in frequency*
Physical violence inc. in severity *...
Partner tried to choke victim *……...
A gun is present in the house *…....
Partner forced victim to have sex *..
Partner used street drugs *…………
Partner threatened to kill victim *....
Victim believes partner capable of
killing her * …………………………...
• Perpetrator AD Military History (ns.)
Control
56%
62%
50%
64%
39%
55%
57%
24%
18%
10%
16%
12%
23%
14%
54%
16%
24%
22%
VICTIM & PERPETRATOR OWNERSHIP OF WEAPON IN
FEMICIDE (N = 311), ATTEMPTED FEMICIDE (N = 182),
ABUSED CONTROL (N=427) & NON-ABUSED CONTROL
(N=418) CASES
74.1
80
Femicide
70
Attempted
52.9
60
Abused control
50
Nonabused control
40
30
20
26.8
15.7 14.6 16.9 15.6
12.7
10
0
Victim
Perpetrator
2=125.6, P< .0001
About Guns & DV…
• 2/3 of men who kill their intimate partners do
so with a gun, according to the FBI. (Bureau of
Justice Statistics 2004, 6)
• Murder-suicides involving intimate partners
and familicide reveal a still greater proportion
of gun use, one approaching 95%. (Violence
Policy Center, 2002. www.vpc.org/studies/amertrend.htm.)
Significant (p<.05)
Variables at Incident Level
(Odds
ratio)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Perpetrator Used Gun ……………………… OR = 24.4
Trigger – Jealousy/she has new relationship.. OR = 4.9
Perpetrator unemployed …………………… OR = 4.4
Trigger - Victim Leaving (33%) ……………. OR = 4.1
Threatened w/weapon prior ……………….. OR = 4.1
Estranged X Control (interaction) …………. OR = 3.4
Estranged X Low control (interaction) ……. OR = 3.1
Perpetrator Stepchild ………………………. OR = 2.4
Highly controlling perpetrator ……………… OR = 2.4
Couple Never Lived Together ……………..
OR =
.31
Prior Arrest for DV ………………………….. OR =
.31
Danger Assessment Risk
Factors Among Murder
(Odds
Victims
Ratio)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Partner used/threatened w weapon……………………..20.2
Partner threatened to kill woman………………………...14.9
Partner tried to choke (strangle) woman …………………9.9
Partner violently and constantly jealous ………………… 9.2
Woman forced to have sex when not wanted …………...7.6
Gun in the house…………………………………………… 6.1
Physical violence increased in severity………………….. 5.2
Partner controls most or all of woman’s daily activities …5.1
Physical violence increased in frequency ………………..4.3
Partner uses illicit drugs…………………………………… 4.2
Woman ever beaten while pregnant ……………………...3.8
Partner reported for child abuse………………………….. 2.9
Partner violent outside the home ………………………… 2.2
Partner threatened or tired to commit suicide ……………1.3
Victim threatened or tied to commit suicide ………………0.5
NIJ Journal, 11/03
About Prior Convictions…
• “The majority of killers in our study had
had no prior convictions. 20 of the 31
killers had not previously been convicted
of a crime of any kind.” (Adams, 2007, P 25)
DA COMPARISON: ACTUAL & ATTEMPTED
FEM SURVIVORS (N=493) & ABUSED
CONTROLS (N=427)
Att/Actual
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Partner is drunk every day *……………….... 42%
Partner controls all victim’s activities *……... 60%
Partner beat victim while pregnant *………... 36%
Partner is violently jealous of victim *………. 79%
7%
Victim threat/tried to commit suicide ………..
Partner threat/tried to commit suicide*……... 39%
9%
Partner violent to victim’s children*………….
Partner is violent outside house*……………. 49%
Partner arrested for DV* (not criminality)…... 27%
Partner hurt a pet on purpose ………………. 10.1%
Control
12%
32%
7.7%
32%
9%
19%
3%
38%
15%
8.5%
Does Victim Perception
= Risk?
Never underestimate victim’s perceptions (Weisz,
2000; Gondolf, 2002). Since victims often
minimize risk, if they perceive the risk as low, do
further assessment. If they perceive the risk as
high, pay attention!
Campbell study: Approximately half of victims (54%
of actual femicides; 45% of attempts) did not
accurately perceive their risk – that perpetrator was
capable of killing her &/or would kill her
Motive in Law
Enforcement Response
• Gaining contextual information can assist
to better predict which cases may escalate
in specific situations:
– Risk for lethality, familicide, etc…
• Can assist the victim to better understand
their specific risks at the scene
Applying Motive In
Prosecution
• Gaining contextual information can assist
to better predict which cases may escalate
in specific situations:
– Risk for lethality, familicide, etc…
• Early engagement with victims
• Jury education, explanation of context in
the specific case and “counter-intuitive”
victim behaviors
Motive in DV Offender
Assessment
• Assessors asked to gain context of
behaviors to gain clues about motive in
offender interview and victim interview
• Example: Threats to harm pets—
desperate or sadistic?
• Questions on family history: rejection by
father, abandonment etc… indicative of
survival based
• Connect to other risk/lethality factors
Understanding Motive:
Assisting Victims and
Children
• Understanding the different motivators of
batterers
– Can improve the understanding of the victim’s
and child’s experience
– Can improve our ability to protect the victim
and children
– Can create better judgment regarding
interaction between the children and the
batterer
Intervention
Motive in BIP
• Programs can apply information about
motive to tailor interventions.
– Survival-based: trauma-informed practices
that understand how disrupted attachment
fuels belief of “need” for relationship
– Entitlement-based: Beliefs and behaviors
challenged, “un-learned”
– Sadistic-based: empathy building, or identify
needs for additional treatment
Considering Motive in
Safety Planning with
Batterer
• Example 1: Survival-based batterer reports
separation from partner in group
– Very high risk time.
– Spend extra time reviewing safety plan.
– Get commitment to call program if having
difficulty.
– Be sure victim is aware of high risk.
Considering Motive in
Safety Planning with
Batterer
• Example 2: Entitlement-based batterer reports
separation from partner in group
– Victim may be in less danger, but can’t count
on that
– Determine meaning of separation for this
batterer, and respond accordingly
• Materially motivated?
• High/low stake in conformity?
–PFA in place?
Considering Motive in
Safety Planning with
Batterer
• Example 3: Sadistic-based batterer reports
separation from partner in group
– What really happened, and is she alive?
– Who else is vulnerable?
Arrest
• A major examination in multiple
jurisdictions found that arrest deters repeat
re-abuse.
• The positive effects of police involvement
and arrest do not depend on the
seriousness of the incident assault,
whether a misdemeanor or a felony.
(NIJ, 2009)
Prosecution and
Sentencing
• Studies have found that prosecution can reduce
subsequent arrests and violence. The key to
reducing re-abuse may depend on the dispositions
imposed.
• The more intrusive sentences — including jail,
work release, electronic monitoring and/or
probation — significantly reduced re-arrest for
domestic violence as compared to the less
intrusive sentences of fines or suspended
sentences without probation.
(NIJ, 2009)
Supervision
• The cumulative effect of probation/parole
monitoring and counseling completion has
been found to significantly lower recidivism
• Specialized supervision of abusers helps
reduce re-abuse.
(NIJ, 2009)
CCR Success
• Arrests and successful prosecutions
increased in several jurisdictions after
engaging in a CCR…
• BIP effectiveness greatly improves when
situated within a community with CCR
(Gondolf, 2003)
Effective BIP
• Research in a nutshell…
– BIP’s can impact positive change, but:
• Need consistency of message throughout
community
• Need a quality program
• Good assessment
• Psychoeducational group modality
• Long enough to create lasting impact
» Brooklyn Experiment: 26 wk vs 8 wk
Research:
BIP Completers
– 67% of batterers who completed psychoeducational batterer programs in the UK had not
reoffended one year later, as opposed to only
25% of those who received other sanctions
(Bowen, Brown, & Gilchrist, 2002).
– Other studies and literature reviews report similar
findings, with 60 to 80% of completers not
reoffending (Buttell & Carney, 2002; Gondolf, 1997; Heckert
& Gondolf, 2000); Some single studies disagree. This
is sometimes due to weaknesses in the studies
(Jackson et.al, 2002)
Effective BIP
Abusive behaviors
Belief system:
Beliefs and Their Impact
• The strongest beliefs impacting their
behavior are their beliefs about
themselves.
• Without the use of trauma-informed
approaches, there are limitations in our
ability to impact their behavior.
Adverse Childhood
Experiences
• Known as the “ACE” Study
• Kaiser-Permanente & CDC Study
• Link between childhood trauma and the
chronic diseases people develop as adults,
as well as social and emotional problems.
• Includes heart disease, lung cancer, diabetes
and many autoimmune diseases, as well as
depression, violence, being a victim of
violence, and suicide.
• This project is supported by subgrant number
14-VAWA-21 awarded by the Kansas
Governor’s Grants Program for the STOP
Formula Grant Program. The opinions,
findings, conclusions, or recommendations
expressed in this publication/
program/exhibition are those of the author(s)
and do not necessarily reflect the views of the
Office of the Kansas Governor or the U.S.
Department of Justice, Office on Violence
Against Women.
Dorthy Stucky Halley, LMSW
Director, Victim Services Division
[email protected]
785-368-8445
Michelle McCormick, LMSW
BIP Unit Coordinator
[email protected]
785-296-3367