Kris Henning

“I didn’t do it, but if I did I had a good reason”: Minimization, Denial, and Attributions of Blame Among Male and Female Domestic Violence Offenders

Women are increasingly being arrested and prosecuted for assaulting an intimate partner. Whereas extensive research has been conducted to identify the treatment needs of male domestic violence offenders, few studies have examined females convicted of the same charges. In the present study 1,267 men and 159 women convicted of intimate partner abuse were compared on scales assessing attributions of blame for their recent offense, minimization, denial, and socially desirable responding. Research with male offenders has identified these factors as important treatment targets, as they appear to influence an offender’s risk for noncompliance and recidivism. The results of the study suggest that both male and female domestic violence offenders engage in socially desirable responding during court-ordered evaluations, that both attribute greater blame for the recent offense to their spouse/partner than they acknowledge for themselves, and that significant numbers of both genders deny the recent incident and/or minimize the severity of the offense. Areas for further research are highlighted along with a discussion of the implications of these findings for practitioners.

A Comparison of Men and Women Arrested for Domestic Violence: Who Presents the Greater Threat?

Recent increases in the number of women arrested for domestic violence raise important questions about implementation of proarrest policies, equivalency of intimate partner aggression across genders, and management of female domestic violence offenders. This study compares demographic characteristics, criminal history variables, and the past domestic violence history of men (n = 5,578) and women (n = 1,126) arrested for domestic assault against a heterosexual intimate partner. Using victim reported information and data collected by local criminal justice agencies, we found that female arrestees were significantly less likely than males to have histories that warrant concern regarding the potential for future violence. Implications of these findings are discussed.

Treatment Needs of Women Arrested for Domestic Violence A Comparison with Male Offenders

Rising numbers of women arrested for domestic violence present many theoretical and practical challenges. At the theoretical level, there is ongoing debate about whether women are equally aggressive as men. At the practical level, little research is available to guide how female cases are handled in the criminal justice system. In this study, data were obtained regarding demographic characteristics, mental health functioning, and childhood familial dysfunction for a large sample of male (n =2,254) and female (n = 281) domestic violence offenders. The women were demographically similar to the men, and few differences were noted in their childhood experiences. Women were more likely than men to have previously attempted suicide, whereas more men had conduct problems in childhood and substance abuse in adulthood. Compared to the male offenders, women reported more symptoms of personality dysfunction and mood disorder. Treatment implications of these findings are discussed.

Utilization of counseling and supportive services by female victims of domestic abuse.

Increasing attention to the high prevalence of domestic violence (DV) and its impact on women’s physical and mental health has resulted in expanded services for abused women. Abused women appear to underutilize the formal counseling services available in many communities, however, and further research is needed to identify factors related to service utilization. In the present study, 1,746 women assaulted by a male intimate partner were identified from a larger pool of women interviewed by Pretrial Services following the arrest of their spouse/partner on domestic abuse charges. The women were selected for the current study if they reported prior physical assaults perpetrated by the same spouse/partner listed in the instant offense. In addition to describing previous physical assaults and psychological abuse by their current spouse/partner, women were also asked whether they had ever sought “formal counseling/supportive services” to address the abuse. Consistent with the prior literature, only a minority of the victims reported prior use of these services (14.9%). Additional analyses indicated that the likelihood of having accessed services varied as a function of victim demographic factors (race, relationship to the offender, income), characteristics of the prior DV (prior injury by partner, forced sexual activity, prior psychological abuse), and whether the victim’s children witnessed the fighting. Limitations of the study and implications for service providers and the courts are discussed.

Minimization, Denial, and Victim Blaming by Batterers: How Much Does the Truth Matter?

Male domestic violence (DV) offenders often minimize their aggression or attribute blame to their partner. These distortions make it difficult to obtain accurate self-report information and men who engage in significant denial are less compliant with treatment. It is also commonly believed that batterers who minimize, deny, and blame their victim are more dangerous than men who accept responsibility for their actions. Data to support this latter opinion remain limited, however, and the few studies that are available have produced mixed findings. In this study, measures of minimization, denial, attributions, and socially desirable responding were collected from a large sample of convicted DV offenders (N = 2,824). Analyses examined the association between these scales and new DV police reports. Little evidence was found to support the hypothesis that minimization, denial, and victim blaming are associated with increased recidivism. Explanations for these findings and suggestions for further study are discussed.

Characteristics of Domestic Violence Offenders: Associations with Childhood Exposure to Violence

Many women are abused by intimate partners, millions of children witness such acts, and many of these children are physically abused. Children who are exposed to violence often evidence difficulties, including violent behavior, as adults. One hypothesized mode of intergenerational transmission is modeling. There is evidence that witnessing and/or experiencing violence are related to different patterns of abusive behavior and, perhaps, psychopathology, but the extent of the relationship is unclear. This study examined differences in generality, frequency, and severity of violent offenses, nonviolent criminal behavior, and psychopathology within a battering population of 1,099 adult males with varying levels of exposure to violence as children. Generality, frequency, and severity of violence and psychopathology all increased as level of childhood exposure to violence increased. Modeling theory was supported by the findings that men who witnessed domestic violence as children committed the most frequent domestic violence, and men who were abused as children were more likely to abuse children. Men who were abused also committed more general violence.

Victim or Offender? Heterogeneity Among Women Arrested for Intimate Partner Violence

Mandatory arrest laws for intimate partner violence (IPV) have increased both the number and proportion of arrests that involve female defendants. Whether these numbers should be as high as they are remains a source of controversy. Most practitioners argue that women are usually arrested for defensive actions used in the face of assaults perpetrated by their spouse/partner. Others believe that these higher arrest rates more accurately reflect the true prevalence of physical aggression perpetrated by women. One way to help clarify this debate is to take a closer look at the women charged with IPV. The present study used self-reported information and criminal justice records on prior aggression to classify 485 women convicted of IPV into four distinct subtypes (i.e., no prior violence, primary victim, primary aggressor, and primary aggressor not identified). Despite the fact that all of these women were arrested for and convicted of IPV, analyses consistently found that few of the women could be considered as the primary aggressor in their relationship. Nor, however, were all of the women classified as primary victims. Methodological issues are discussed as well as the policy, practice, and research implications of this study.

Fathering by Partner-Abusive Men: Attitudes on Children's Exposure to Interparental Conflict and Risk Factors for Child Abuse

A substantial body of research concludes that children in homes marked by intimate partner violence (IPV) and conflict are at increased risk for maladjustment. Although studies often attribute these difficulties to the aggressive acts witnessed, other research and theoretical work suggests that disrupted parenting and co-occurring child maltreatment play an equally critical role in the onset of the childrens psychological and behavioral problems. Despite the clear importance of parenting in the context of IPV, relatively little scholarship has been devoted to the topic, particularly when it comes to examining fathers. The current study sought to better understand the paternal relationships of men arrested for spouse/partner abuse, to examine their beliefs about childrens exposure to interparental conflict and to identify the specific factors that may place their children at risk for maltreatment. The data consisted of questionnaires administered to 3,824 men attending a court-ordered evaluation after they were convicted of assaulting an intimate partner. Analyses revealed that most of the men had some type of fathering role with underage children (n = 2,508; 65.6%) and in most cases these relationships continued following their arrest. Although the majority of the men acknowledged that their children had been exposed to interparental conflicts, few perceived that their children had been affected by the arguing. Also of concern was the fact that risk factors for child maltreatment were highly prevalent in this population. Implications of these findings and suggestions for those working with domestic offenders are discussed.

Criminal Prosecution of Domestic Violence Offenses An Investigation of Factors Predictive of Court Outcomes

Whereas significant research has been conducted to identify the legal and extralegal factors that influence police decisions concerning the arrest of domestic violence (DV) offenders, significantly fewer studies have examined prosecutorial and judicial decision making with regard to this offense. Among the few studies available in the extant literature, none have looked at the full range of decisions made during the adjudication process (i.e., pretrial release, prosecution, disposition, and sentencing). Similarly, few of the available studies have included female defendants, despite recent increases in the number of women charged for this offense. Using a sample of 4,178 defendants arrested for a misdemeanor or felony domestic violence offense, this research identified the suspect and offense characteristics that had the greatest effect on court decisions. Explanations for the resulting findings and recommendations for further research are discussed.

Gender Differences in Risk Factors for Intimate Partner Violence Recidivism

Risk assessment measures are increasingly used to evaluate offenders charged with intimate partner violence (IPV). Scales currently available for this purpose suffer from two important limitations: First, several well-established risk factors from research with general offenders are excluded from most IPV scales, including age, deviant peer associations, and antisocial attitudes. Further research is needed to determine whether these factors should be included in the next generation of IPV risk measures. Second, all of the existing scales have been validated solely for use with males despite increased arrests among women. This study sought to investigate both of these issues using a large sample of male and female IPV offenders. The results highlight gender differences in risk factors for recidivism.