The researchers sought to add to the incipient
literature on randomized studies of batterer treatment. Unlike other
studies, batterers in the site of this study were mandated to
treatment by judicial order instead of probation departments. The
researchers also aimed to complete a study that compared batterers
assigned to treatment to batterers assigned to a community service
program irrelevant to the problem of violence, whereas previous
studies compared treatment to the absence of treatment. The
researchers also sought to find both short-term (6 months
post-sentence) and long-term (12 months post-sentence) treatment
outcomes.
The study was conducted using a true experimental
design consisting of spousal assault cases drawn from three of eight
post-arraignment parts in Kings County (New York) Criminal Court. Two
of the parts were specialized domestic violence parts, and the third
was a jury trial part where domestic violence and other cases were
transferred if a negotiated disposition could not be reached. The
cases included were adjudicated between February 19, 1995, and March
1, 1996. The study consisted of 376 criminal court defendants who were
mandated to attend a 40-hour batterer treatment program or to complete
40 hours of community service. The random assignment was made at
sentencing, after all parties (judge, prosecutor, and defense) had
agreed that batterer treatment was appropriate, the defendant agreed
to batterer treatment and was accepted by the Alternatives to Violence
(ATV) program, and the program was available based on the random
assignment process. Batterers and victims were interviewed separately
to gather data regarding background information (violence histories
and demography), measures of new violence, beliefs about domestic
violence, conflict management skills, and locus of control. Several
measures of new violence were also included such as new arrests, new
crime reports (that may or may not result in an arrest), and
self-reports of violence by victims and batterers. In addition,
victims were administered a short scale measuring well-being. Upon
completion of the first interview, the defendant's name and case
identifier were entered onto the next line of a logbook. Each line of
the book had a pre-assigned treatment designation (batterer treatment
or community service) determined through the use of a random number
table. Defendants assigned to the ATV batterer treatment program were
given a start date (usually within a week of intake). The interviews
were conducted on three occasions: at the time of sentencing (in
person with the batterer and via phone with the victim), at 6 months
after sentencing, and 12 months after sentencing -- via phone for
both the second and third interviews. Interviews at the three time
points were identical except for the omission of background
information on the second and third interviews. Official data on new
complaints to the police and new arrests were gathered 6 and 12 months
after sentencing, using computerized administrative records. With the
help of ATV administrators, an eight-week ATV course was developed for
this study based on the original model of 26 weeks where participants
could complete the same 40 hours of group time through bi-weekly
two-and-one-half hour sessions with lower fees per session. The new
format began to be offered after the first 129 participants had been
assigned to the original 26-week groups, therefore from August 15,
1995, until the end of intake, defendants were offered a choice
between 8-week and 26-week formats. Defendants rejected by lottery
from batterer treatment were mandated by judges to participate in 40
hours of community service. Typically, the service was performed over
a two-week period. For offenders who were employed, flexible hours
were arranged over a two-month period in order that they could
continue their jobs. Participants were assigned to work on renovating
housing units, clearing vacant lots to make way for community gardens,
painting senior citizen centers, and cleaning up playgrounds. In the
course of their service, participants were given education about drugs
and the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). Participants in both
forms of treatment were expelled if a pattern of nonattendance
developed.
The sampling frame consisted of spousal assault cases in
Kings County (New York) Criminal Court which were adjudicated between
February 19, 1995, and March 1, 1996. Batterers were only eligible for
inclusion in the experiment if all parties (prosecutor, defense, and
judge) agreed that batterer treatment was appropriate. Such agreement
was not forthcoming in a small percentage of cases, most often because
the defense refused to agree to treatment. Additionally, all
defendants had to agree to batterer treatment, be accepted to the
Alternatives to Violence (ATV) program, and the program needed to be
available to them based on the random assignment process. Since all
defendants had to agree to treatment, the study did not include cases
where batterers were unmotivated. However, all participants were
court-mandated -- they did not volunteer for treatment on their own
volition. Still, it was common knowledge in the Kings County (New
York) Criminal Court that misdemeanor batterer defendants were not
facing jail time, and participants in treatment certainly knew from
counsel that they were choosing the program over another alternative
to incarceration. In 28 percent of the control cases, judges overrode
the random assignment to deny batterer treatment and instead mandated
the ATV program for defendants who had been assigned to community
service. There were no judicial overrides of cases randomly assigned
to the ATV program.
Defendants under the jurisdiction of the Kings County (New
York) Criminal Court for domestic assault charges from February 19,
1995, to March 1, 1996.
individual
Data for this study were gathered through both
face-to-face and telephone interviews with the defendant and telephone
interviews with the victim. Computerized information was also
collected from records of the Criminal Justice Agency (CJA) and the
New York City Police Department (NYPD).
administrative records data
event/transaction data
medical records
survey data
experimental data
face-to-face interview
telephone interview
record abstracts
Data collected in this study include demographic
information gathered about the batterer and the victim such as age,
race, ethnic group, educational attainment, employment status, job
type, income, and source of income. Variables are also included from
both parties on their status as a couple when the assault occurred and
the number of children the couple share together. Batterer-specific
variables include the type of treatment the batterer was assigned to,
the number of previous cases against the batterer, and the use of
substances. Victim-specific variables include the frequency, types,
and severity of abuse inflicted upon them and the type of assistance,
if any, they received (medical, social, financial, or psychological).
Psychological variables are also included regarding victim self
esteem. Data are also included on their feelings about how much of a
threat they believed their batterers were to them. Information from
administrative records includes dates and types of any new crimes or
arrests by the batterers.
The response rate with victims was 50 percent for
the first interview, 46 percent for the second interview, and 50
percent for the third interview. First interviews with batterers were
obtained with 95 percent of the sample because defendants were present
at intake in court for the treatment program. Subsequent completion
rates were 40 percent for the second interview and 24 percent for the
third interview.
Harrell's adaptation of the Straus Conflict Tactics Scale, a
scale based on the Inventory of Beliefs about Wife Beating Scale,
Conflict Resolution Skills Scale, 12 items from the Nowicki-Strickland
Internal-External Control Scale, the Life Satisfaction Scale (Index
B), and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale.