Content area
Full text
Over the past 25 years, batterer intervention has become the most probable disposition following a plea or conviction on domestic battery charges and, consequently, batterer intervention programs (BIPs) have proliferated. Despite their popularity, and recent attempts by states to regulate practice, little is known about the actual programs operating in the field. The aim of this study was to examine the philosophy, structure, leadership, curricula, and support systems of BIPs. Respondents from 276 batterer intervention programs in 45 states described their programs via an anonymous, Web-based survey. The results provide some insight regarding the workings of actual BIPs and also point out problems such as the dearth of programs in languages other than English and the failure to translate recommendations for prescriptive approaches into practice.
Since 1980, through the efforts of the battered women's movement, intimate partner violence (IPV) has been increasingly recognized as a crime at the state, county, and city levels of legislation, leading to increased proarrest police policies, more vigorous prosecution, more convictions of, and guilty pleas by, batterers. Psychoeducational treatment programs (batterer intervention programs; BIPs) became widely utilized by courts in sentencing (Babcock & Taillade, 2000; Hotaling & Sugarman, 1986). Court-mandated treatment owed its popularity to the fact that in many cases the offense was at the level of a misdemeanor (and in many cases a first offense), which would not justify incarceration. Furthermore, incarceration also has negative consequences for victims, such as loss of income, social stigma, and a negative impact on any children (Davis & Taylor, 1999). Many victims remain with their partners and don't want their partner jailed (Hamberger & Hastings, 1993; Jennings, 1987; Snyder & Scheer, 1981). In most cases, jail sentences would be brief and there is little evidence in the criminology literature that incarceration serves a rehabilitative function (Boudouris & Turnbull, 1985). Treatment of batterers also holds out the possibility of preventing further violence by the offender.
At present, most states have enacted legislation empowering and encouraging the courts to utilize BIPs in sentencing and in some cases as a diversionary program. In this environment, the number of BIPs operating in the United States has increased exponentially. Gelles (2001) suggested that "it is reasonable to assume that there are thousands of treatment programs treating...