by Dr. Barbara Fisher-Townsend

“One Family’s Story” — Part 2

As we saw in Part 1 of “One Family’s Story” (see “How Can We End the Cycle?” in the PASCH Summer 2009 Newsletter), Bill — who was in the early stages of attending his intervention program — decided that he was not like the other men enrolled: he was not violent and did not see the need to spend additional money on this treatment. He continued to assign blame to his wife Mary for the situation in which he found himself. In addition to his violent behavior, Bill also abused alcohol and was mandated to attend an alcohol treatment program as well. By quitting both programs, he signaled to others his denial of any responsibility for his own addictive or abusive behavior. In essence, he saw no necessity “to do the work.”

Unfortunately, his decision means that he and his family continue to suffer the impact of violence within their home. Perhaps he could have accepted responsibility and developed empathy if he had kept going to his group sessions, gradually internalizing themes and ideas from the curriculum. But his inability to become accountable led to him dropping out of the programs, reassaulting his wife, and being rearrested and charged with a second count of domestic violence.

The abuse cycle repeated itself even though there had been formal intervention by the criminal justice system, a batterers’ intervention program and a substance abuse treatment program. A second domestic violence charge in many locales means the charges escalate from misdemeanor to felony. The consequences thus escalate as well, with time in prison a distinct possibility.

Any sense of hope within this family has been diminished: the hope felt so dearly by Mary for a peaceful Christian family life; the children’s hope for a secure and loving family home that includes having Dad around; Bill’s own hope and desire that the status quo would be restored; and the hope of Reverend Jones that this family would remain together as a divinely ordained unit. Diminished too are goals of others working to bring change to Bill’s thinking and behavior. The criminal justice workers will see his file reappear and realize that the cycle begins once again, that all of the safeguards and procedures within the “system” have failed to produce the desired results. The therapeutic staff working with Bill in both batterers’ intervention and substance abuse treatment will also see their attempts fail. This situation, and that of countless other families, appears to be hopeless.

Questions to Consider

Q. Does Bill’s connection with a faith community increase or decrease his likelihood of completing program requirements for batterer intervention?

A. Men’s motivation to change may be important for understanding their completion rates (Daly and Pelowski 2000). A research case file analysis from one faith-based program in the northwest U.S. indicates that those with the motivation engendered by a positive attitude about the potential of faith are more likely to complete program requirements. Certainly, the faith of these men appears to be a key motivator in keeping them in the program. Men from another faith-based agency who were interviewed indicated that their faith does play a role in their attempts to change, and that reading the Bible and praying enhance the motivation for them to “keep on doing the work.” These men were able to recognize the promise and the power of faith in their transformative journey.

Bill clearly did not recognize this promise. Despite his hope that his family’s life would get back to normal, Bill did not seek the assistance of his faith community in his time of crisis, nor did he turn to his own personal faith, thus he was unable to access the support and resources these might have provided.

Q. Would a faith-based treatment program for batterers and/or alcohol abuse have made a difference in keeping Bill in the program(s)?

A. The courtesy and compassion of the therapeutic staff in faith-based intervention agencies was highlighted by men interviewed for our research. These qualities, combined with an atmosphere of respect, professionalism and acceptance, provide a better learning environment for these men than those experienced in other agencies focusing on confrontation and retribution. Of course, it is necessary to confront men’s abusive thinking and behavior, but doing this within a setting of respect and acceptance models the message one is trying to impart.

One can only speculate whether Bill would have been more successful in a faith-based treatment program because he chose not to access faith-based resources. Perhaps his entrenched views regarding the qualities of a proper and submissive Christian wife might best have been challenged by those equipped with the language of faith necessary to counter his incorrectly interpreted “biblical beliefs.” Additionally, a faith-based agency, wherein the everyday interactions of those in attendance are permeated with references to their faith, may have been more familiar to Bill based on his membership in a church community.

Q. What are the dimensions of Bill’s failure to take full responsibility and become accountable for his abusive behavior?

A. Gaining empathy is perhaps the first step toward taking responsibility and becoming accountable. It is necessary to comprehend a victim’s feelings regarding the abuse in order to move toward changed thinking and behavior. Responsibility acts both as a coping strategy and a transition point necessary for change, but it does take time to build responsibility. It moves along a continuum from first rejecting any notion of responsibility —the denial, minimization, and blaming phase—to gradually accepting full responsibility for one’s actions. Becoming accountable is another process necessary for change as men learn to stop blaming others for their behavior. Men’s hopes and dreams for their children help to activate their accountability. They need to become accountable both as models for their children and so they might once again be part of their children’s lives.

Bill appears unable to develop empathy for Mary’s feelings. While he wishes for the return of the status quo, he makes no effort to understand the ramifications of his abusive behavior toward Mary and the children. He allows and encourages her to blame herself for his behavior. He simply expects that they will “get over it.” After all, he is not responsible for his actions. The work-related stress in his life, combined with Mary’s inability to be a proper Christian wife, serve as justifications for his behavior. He sees no contradiction between offering grace at dinner and abusing Mary after dinner. Unable to become accountable, he continues to assign blame to others for the situation in which he finds himself, throughout his limited therapeutic interventions.

Q. What are the roadblocks that stand in the way of Bill’s journey toward change?

A. Denial of abuse is common among men attending batterers’ intervention programs. The intake forms in fifty files of men who were court-mandated to attend a faith-based intervention are replete with denials, minimizations, and justifications. Among those men personally interviewed at the other faith-based agency, denial was less prevalent, perhaps because they were already moving through the intervention program rather than just beginning. Substance abuse combines with denial to jeopardize motivations and expectations for changed behavior. Those men who were able to call upon their “higher power” to assist them in moving forward one day at a time were able to take small steps toward change. The 12 steps of Alcoholics Anonymous, and other similar 12-step programs, are meant to assist movement toward changed behavior and thinking.

Bill was unable to get past these critical roadblocks of denial and substance abuse. His movement toward change was thus stymied at a very early stage of therapeutic intervention as his stated motivations could not sustain him to move past these difficult roadblocks. The support of his personal faith and his faith community might have proved very beneficial when he faltered.

Q. What resources are available for Bill in his time of crisis?

A. The development of hope takes place as men interact within the therapeutic environment and become re-socialized. This hope-in-action can act as a key resource for helping men to actualize movement toward change. It assists them to realistically adapt their goals to fit their circumstances and to develop resilience that can fortify them as they deal with the many roadblocks that continuously appear on their road toward change.

The development of supportive networks is also identified as necessary action toward change. These networks, whether found in prison through family and friends or in one’s faith community, can offer guidance from a practical and biblical perspective, serve as a haven in difficult times, and model the process of hope-in-action and hopefulness. Resources such as these can facilitate movement along the path toward change.

Bill did not seek out and find supportive networks. Since his time in group intervention was relatively short lived, he would not have developed positive interactions with the therapeutic staff and other group members. Indeed, he felt that he was not violent like the other men and therefore had nothing in common with them. He was unable to recognize the need for intervention of any kind, believed there was no need for him to change, and therefore saw no need to develop supports for change.

Q. What factors are important for Reverend Jones’ decision regarding what assistance is necessary for this family in crisis?

A. Christian credentialing and denial of abuse among faith communities are difficult hurdles to overcome. Yet we know that clergy referral of men is extremely powerful in encouraging and keeping men in batterers’ treatment programs. The numbers are clear: 64.7 percent of men who were clergy-referred to the program at one faith-based agency completed the program, compared to 56.6 percent of men who were court-mandated and who would generate criminal justice consequences for non-completion.

Faith-based agencies offer a unique approach to batterer intervention based on attention to and primacy of faith. Clergy referrals to faith-based therapeutic agencies are based on experiencing positive interactions with therapeutic staff, seeing positive results in the agency clients, and, importantly, congruence of beliefs. The relevance of a faith-based approach, linked with these three key factors, can ease the way toward necessary clergy referrals to specialized and knowledgeable therapeutic agencies. Secular agencies, however, are increasingly recognizing the importance of providing a context where one’s faith or spiritual orientation is acknowledged and accepted.

Reverend Jones admits that despite previously encountering family abuse within his congregation, he has had little opportunity for training or education on this issue from either a secular or a biblical perspective. His faith tells him that keeping the marriage intact should be accorded primacy. His heart tells him that this family is suffering and in need of guidance. His experience tells him that Bill requires intervention in order to change. Reverend Jones offers advice that fits within his worldview and that is familiar to him. Interestingly, he does recommend Christian counseling for Mary and Bill, but unfortunately he recommends couples counseling due to perceived “communication difficulties.” He is unaware that in cases of wife abuse, couples counseling can be extremely harmful and dangerous and is therefore prohibited by most jurisdictions in North America. Had he been aware of a faith-based therapeutic intervention program for batterers, perhaps Pastor Jones would have suggested that Bill make use of those resources. In his role as her spiritual director, he also recommended that Mary turn to her Bible for theological guidance and hope. Certainly many of the men interviewed indicated that they found reading the Bible to be extremely beneficial. Finally, Reverend Jones suggests that Bill read parenting resources developed by Dr. James Dobson, a pastor who is widely accepted and respected within the conservative Christian community. A better understanding of the dynamics of abuse within the family would, no doubt, have led him to make alternate suggestions, but these suggestions and recommendations are what Pastor Jones knows and believes to be useful.

Despite any attempted interventions by the criminal justice system, the batterers’ intervention program, or his community of faith, Bill does reoffend and is charged with a felony abuse charge. The situation in this family has escalated.

Q. Should Mary be encouraged to face the future with optimism regarding Bill and changed behavior?

A. Rates of change among men who have abused their intimate partners are not promising; optimism is muted. Based on years of data, we know that the effectiveness of treatment programs varies according to personal characteristics, motivations, and other contributing problems such as substance abuse. Importantly, we also know that program noncompleters are more likely to maintain entrenched views on sex roles, have higher rates of reassault, and be in denial about their abusive behavior. Given that one faith-based agency executive director said that out of hundreds of men she has dealt with she could count on one hand the number who have changed to “walk the world in a different way,” it seems evident that women have little reason for optimism about significant change in their husbands. Literature indicates, however, that for many women small changes are sufficient to continue in the marriage or at least to maintain hope.

Given that Bill has refused to accept responsibility for his actions, has withdrawn from the mandated intervention programs, and has reassaulted Mary, maintaining an optimistic view that he will now change and that their family life can be restored seems unrealistic. If he had sought assistance and support from his community of faith or other faith-based resources, this situation might have been different. What Mary can be optimistic about is a new life with her children free of violence and enriched by the support of her faith community. She can also maintain her hope that eventually Bill will take the steps necessary to enact change in his thinking and behavior.

Q. How will all the parties involved interact as the cycle continues in the lives of Bill and Mary?

A. Hope-in-action continues even in the face of disappointment. Bill may feel no hope for his future, but that state of hopelessness can and will be changed through interaction and intervention with therapists, faith leaders, and criminal justice staff—all of whom are able to maintain hope themselves in the face of very difficult circumstances. Each of these parties plays a role in bringing hope to the forefront and modeling hope and hopefulness.

The criminal justice system will continue its involvement in Bill’s life and in the lives of his family, Bill no doubt will be required to attend and complete a batterers’ intervention program and a substance abuse program, and Reverend Jones and his faith community will continue to provide guidance, support, and resources for the family. The intersection continues.

For resources and information, visit