Mr. Dankworth writes that programs which follow recommended guidelines are successful at reducing physical attacks by batterers.
Even if this is true, this "benefit" must be weighed against several potential drawbacks: 1) How many jurisdictions actually have reliable and consistent guidelines for batterers' treatment programs which are followed by sentencing judges? How many courts are sending men to unethical, "quickie" anger management seminars or similar programs? 2) How many abusers flunk out of treatment (fail to complete or to show up in the first place)? Are these men receiving sanctions from the courts? Are their failures counted in the success statistics of the programs, or does research only measure change among men who complete the program? 3) How much false hope is inculcated among victims by the promise of treatment? How many women reconcile with their abusers thinking counseling will cure the problem, only to be victimized once again? 4) Does the promise of abuser treatment allow the community--in particular police, judges and prosecutors--to evade their responsibilities: to take abuse seriously as the crime it is, to establish meaningful protection for the victim? Marya Hart Minneapolis, MN USA ***End-violence is sponsored by UNIFEM and receives generous support from ICAP*** To post a message, send it to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To subscribe or unsubscribe, send a message to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. In the 1st line of the message type: subscribe end-violence OR type: unsubscribe end-violence Archives of previous End-violence messages can be found at: http://www.edc.org/GLG/end-violence/hypermail/
