![]()
CHAPTER 1
UNDERSTANDING DOMESTIC ABUSE
To appreciate the impact of domestic abuse (DA), and understand its relationship to mental health, counsellors need to be aware of the complex nature of DA. It is only with such understanding that effective intervention and treatment strategies can be implemented. Clinicians must ensure that they have considerable knowledge of prevailing myths surrounding DA, including their own stereotypes and biases. This needs to be supported with an understanding of precisely what constitutes DA. As there is no single, universally agreed definition of DA, both survivors and professionals may be hindered in identifying and naming such abuse experiences. Clinicians require a clearly specified definition of DA to guide their practice, and understand prevalence and incidence rates.
Survivors and perpetrators of DA are not a homogenous group and clinicians need to be aware of who are at risk of abuse or abusing. While the majority of DA appears to be directed at females by male perpetrators, current research shows that females also abuse males, and that DA is a feature in a number of same sex relationships. Clinicians need to have a good understanding of the range of perpetrators of DA, and the underlying factors that give rise to the need for coercive control and abuse. Such knowledge will enable the counsellor, and ultimately the survivor, to identify that DA is driven and fuelled by anxieties, insecurities and internal pressures emanating from the perpetrator, and not due to the survivorâs putative inadequacies. This will enable the counsellor to separate survivor dynamics from abuser dynamics, and facilitate the rebuilding of self-structures that have been damaged during DA.
While it is critical for clinicians to understand the relationship between mental health and DA, counsellors cannot afford to ignore the socio-political, cultural and economic factors that support DA. An awareness of theories of DA which incorporate socially constructed meaning around gender, race, power and control, domination and submission, and the hierarchical structure of families will allow for a more comprehensive understanding of the many dynamics that give rise to DA, and which create obstacles to leaving abusive relationships.
This chapter aims to increase knowledge of DA by examining prevailing DA myths and evaluating these in relation to recent research. In order to understand what constitutes DA, current definitions, the range of abusive behaviours, and the complex nature of abusive relationships will be explored. This chapter will also look at survivors and perpetrators profiles and consider the range of theories thought to account for DA within a socio-political-cultural framework.
Myths associated with domestic abuse
There are a number of prevailing myths associated with DA and clinicians need to familiarise themselves with these and ensure that they have access to current research to challenge these myths, and identify their own biases and stereotypes.
MYTH
DA is just about physical violence.
REALITY
DA is any incident of threatening behaviour, violence or abuse (psychological, physical, sexual, financial or emotional) between adults who are or have been intimate partners or family members, regardless of gender or sexuality (Home Office 2006). Physical violence or threat of violence is used to control, intimidate and subjugate the partner and to induce fear and control. Many abusers need to use violence only intermittently to reinforce control and domination, rather than resorting to violence continuously.
MYTH
DA happens only to females and is perpetrated by males.
REALITY
Statistically, the majority of survivors of DA are female, but there is considerable evidence that males are abused by females (Cook 1997), and that DA occurs in same sex relationships (Kaschak 2001). It is likely that such DA is more hidden due to underreporting and fear of humiliation or stigmatisation.
MYTH
All domestic abusers are alike.
REALITY
Perpetrators of DA are not homogenous and can vary enormously in terms of motivation to abuse, and how the abuse is enacted (Dutton 2007; Jacobson and Gottman 1998; Lachkar 2004). Understanding the range and type of abuser enables the counsellor, and survivor, to separate abuser dynamics from survivor dynamics and increase awareness of the impact of abuse.
MYTH
There is a singular reason why DA occurs.
REALITY
There is no singular reason to account for DA. It is the complex interaction of a range of historical, political, socioeconomic, cultural and psychobiological factors (Herman 1992a; Lockley 1999).
MYTH
Survivors in DA relationships have certain personality characteristics that predispose them to it.
REALITY
While there are vulnerability factors that elevate the risk of DA such as previous history of victimisation, or traumatisation in childhood, these are not personality defects or disturbances. In essence such vulnerability factors reflect damaged self-structures which prevent survivors from identifying their needs (Herman 2005). Counsellors must ensure they do not pathologise survivors, or collude in victim blaming (Dutton 1992).
MYTH
Victims of DA are helpless, passive and fragile.
REALITY
Survivors are often strong, and use a variety of coping strategies to manage. Any examples of passivity or helplessness may be symptomatic of trauma, not personality disturbance. Counsellors need to validate the survivorâs courage and strength, identify existing coping strategies, and build upon these (Herman 1992a).
MYTH
If a survivor of DA doesnât leave the partner it must be because he/she enjoys it and is masochistic.
REALITY
This myth is associated with victim blaming and pathologising, and shows a profound lack of understanding. Professionals need to be aware that the greatest danger and risk is when the survivor leaves. In addition there are many psychobiological, social and practical factors that make it extremely difficult to leave an abusive relationship (Herman 1992a).
MYTH
Victims of DA come from low socioeconomic status (SES), have little or no education, no job skills, and have numerous kids.
REALITY
Research has shown that survivors can come from any SES group, educational or employment background. Survivors from higher SES groups may not come to the attention of agencies as they seek help privately and are not included in statutory statistical analysis.
MYTH
Battered women have done something to provoke it and therefore deserve it and are culpable.
REALITY
No one deserves DA and while many relationships have arguments and disagreements, this is not the same as DA. The only person who is responsible and accountable for DA is the perpetrator. Despite perceived difficulties, perpetrators of DA choose to use coercion, control and violence and must be held accountable for that choice.
MYTH
Perpetrators of DA are socially inept, socially inappropriate or violent in all their relationships, including friends and at work.
REALITY
There is no evidence for this. Most abusers are able to control their violence and abuse and enact it only at home. Many domestic abusers present as charming, high-functioning and socially very able individuals who perpetrate abuse only in intimate relationships (Dutton 2007; Horley 1988; Jacobson and Gottman 1998).
MYTH
Perpetrators of DA have anger management problems.
REALITY
This is not supported by research evidence, which indicates that many perpetrators exercise extraordinary control over their anger outside the domestic arena (Dutton 2007; Jacobson and Gottman 1998). Generally perpetrators of DA do not physically attack friends, colleagues or strangers because their anger is invariably contained and controlled, and is unleashed only on their intimate partner.
MYTH
Alcohol and drug use cause DA.
REALITY
While alcohol and drugs are associated with DA, they do not cause DA. Alcohol and drugs exercise a disinhibiting effect which permits DA but does not cause it (World Health Organisation (WHO) 2006).
MYTH
Abusive relationships will never change for the better.
REALITY
Some abusive relationships can recover and heal, providing both the survivor and perpetrator are committed to such change. Counsellors need to support survivors in whichever option they want to consider and support them in their decision. If the survivor chooses to stay, the abuser must give assurance to relinquish not only the violence but also the need to control.
MYTH
DA often stops on its own.
REALITY
There is considerable evidence that DA escalates over time and increases in frequency and severity (Walby 2004) and clinicians must monitor and assess the degree of danger and threat throughout the therapeutic process.
MYTH
Victims could stop DA by changing their own behaviour.
REALITY
The abuser is solely responsible for the abuse and needs to change abuse behaviour. Survivors frequently modulate their behaviour through compliance, mind reading, and acquiescing to abuser demands to minimise abuse, and yet find that this does not protect them from it.
MYTH
Survivors of DA grew up in abusive families.
REALITY
Some survivors may have experience of DA and abuse in childhood, but by no means all. Research shows that perpetrators of DA are more likely to have a family history of abuse, and impaired attachment (Dutton 2007).
MYTH
Clinical assessment of survivors DA will lead to pathologising them.
REALITY
While there have been many examples of this in the past, this is not necessarily the case. Clinicians need to ensure that any assessment is conducted in an ethical and sensitive manner with an awareness of the dangers of pathologising. Equally, to minimise the psychobiological impact of DA is to invalidate the survivorâs experience, disavow its traumatic effects, and ultimately deny appropriate treatment intervention (Dutton 1992; Herman 1992a).
MYTH
Psychotherapy is more effective for abusers than punishment.
REALITY
This is not true for all. While psychotherapy can be helpful for some perpetrators of DA, some abusers will manipulate such interventions (Dutton 2007; Jacobson and Gottman 1998). The advantage of punishment and custodial sentences is that it provides a clear message that DA is unacceptable and will not be tolerated.
MYTH
Once the survivor has left the abusive relationship, they will be safe from future abuse or DA.
REALITY
Survivors are often at continued risk as many abusers will continue to exert control even after leaving the abuse relationship (Abrahams 2007). Survivors will be better equipped to manage such risks if they have a better understanding of the dynamics of DA, and if self-efficacy and self-agency have been restored (Herman 1992a). The counselling process can provide a safe therapeutic space in which to dissemble or unravel the complex factors in DA, restore damaged self-structures and restore internal and external safety, and rebuild life to minimise susceptibility to any future abuse experiences.
Defining domestic abuse
To challenge the myths surrounding DA, professionals need to understand precisely what DA is. Currently there is no single, universally agreed definition of DA, although it is generally accepted that DA is the use of coercive control within an intimate or family relationship. While statistically females appear to be more vulnerable to DA, one cannot ignore, invalidate or marginalise female DA towards males, or same sex DA. This may be due to reporting bias and greater fear of stigmatisation. It is essential that all professionals working with DA acknowledge female perpetrators of DA and the prevalence of DA in gay and lesbian relationships (Kaschak 2001).
The definition of domestic violence proposed by the Home Office (2006) is âany incident of threatening behaviour, violence or abuse (psychological, physical, sexual, financial or emotional) between adults who are or have been intimate partners or family members, regardless of gender or sexualityâ. While this definition acknowledges the range of DA behaviour, it does not reflect the use of coercive control in DA and the pattern of abusive or controlling behaviour perpetrated over time. DA rarely starts with act of violence or physical attack, but is characterised by controlling behaviours that escalates over time, which become a measure of the perpetratorâs dominance and survivorâs level of submission.
The British Medical Association (BMA 2007) uses the term domestic abuse, and asserts that DA can be passive or active. Passive DA is covert or suppressed anger often displayed in lack of concern for victim, poor care, emotional neglect or failure to protect, while active abuse manifests as overt anger directed at the victim resulting in assault, injury, intimidation and rape.
The Womenâs Aid Federation (2005) and Respect (2004) use the term domestic violence (DV) and define DV as
a pattern of controlling behaviour against an intimate partner or ex-partner, that includes but is not limited to physical assaults, sexual assaults, emotional abuse, isolation, economic abuse, threats, stalking and intimidation. Although only some forms of domestic violence are illegal and attract criminal sanctions (physical and sexual assault, stalking, threats to kill), other forms of violence can also have very serious and lasting effects on a personâs sense of self, wellbeing and autonomy. Violent and abusive behaviour is used in an effort to control the partner based on the perpetratorâs sense of entitlement. This behaviour may be directed at others â especially children â with the intention of controlling the intimate partner. Social and institutional power structures support some groups using abuse and violence in order to control other groups ...
