Content area
Abstract
The current research explored the differences in risk and need factors associated with different types of batterers in comparison to other offenders. Historically there have been problems in this literature with male batterers being sampled without the use of any typologies, despite the wide acceptance that they are a heterogeneous group of individuals, differing in areas such as severity of abuse, generality of aggression, and psychopathology. In response, a number of researchers have developed typologies of risk and need. The current research employed a modified version of the typology proposed by Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart (1994). One hundred and fifty-four male offenders, incarcerated at a provincial institution, participated in the study. Subjects were coded as to whether they were: violent only with an intimate partner (FOV); violent both in and outside of the home (GV); violent only with strangers (no intimate partner) (SOV); or not violent (NV). Numerous paper and pencil measures were administered, as well as interview-based measures, including the Psychopathy Checklist-Short Version (PCL:SV) and the Spousal Assault Risk Assessment Guide (SARA). Results indicated that the offender groups were homogeneous in terms of childhood background and parental dysfunction. This was thought to be due to the sample being comprised of all incarcerates, with such dysfunction being more typical of male offenders, generally. The two Batterer groups (FOV, GV) were more abusive within their relationships, held attitudes that were more supportive of domestic violence and sympathetic to male batterers as compared to the other violent (SOV) and non-violent offenders. In contrast, FOV batterers were more similar to non-violent offenders in their general criminal attitudes than they were the other violent groups (GV, SOV). Psychopathy and impulsivity differentiated the violent from the non-violent offenders, while there were no differences among the groups on the measure of personality (NEO-PI-R). Lastly, the SARA proved to be a useful risk assessment instrument and was able to better differentiate the four groups than were the PCL:SV or the Level of Service Inventory-Ontario Revision (LSI-OR). This has important implications for both treatment and court policies and procedures that determine how different types of domestic batterers are dealt with.