Type:	Journal Article
Title:	Recidivism among spousal abusers, predictions and program evaluation
Other Titles:	Journal of interpersonal violence
Authors:	Shipway, Lee Turinetti, Greg J Hendricks, Bryan Werner, Todd
Keywords:	Criminal justice responses;Perpetrators
Year:	2006
Publisher:	Sage Publications
Citation:	21 (6), June 2006
Notes:	This article reports a study in the US that looked at the effectiveness of 2 interventions (a programme called Stopping Abuse for Everyone – SAFE; and a cognitive restructuring programme called Reasoning and Rehabilitation – R & R), for dealing with court-referred spousal abusers. A literature overview is provided. Methodology included a sample of 200 offenders charged with domestic abuse (probationary and deferred-judgment). At the entry into the programme, clients were given the Level of Service Inventory-Revised (LSI-R), a structured interview based on questions to guide decisions on the level of supervision for offenders. The LSI-R was explored to look at its effectiveness in predicting re-offending among those charged with domestic abuse. Offenders were tracked at 6-month, 12-month, and 18-month intervals after completion of their treatment (or withdrawal from it). An offender was classified as recidivating if the database had a record of any offence for domestic violence to an intimate partner. The study reported that 35 of the 200 clients (17.5%) were coded as treatment failures. It also noted that the failure rate of 17.5% after 18 months of treatment is far below those reported in the literature. Those completing the SAFE programme had significantly lower total LSI-R scores than those who did not. These scores suggest those that completed SAFE programmes had stronger backgrounds in education, employment and financial status or less severe criminal history. Of those in R & R, 32.4% failed and 14.4% of those not participating in R & R failed. However, only those who were considered at highest risk were referred to R & R. Most of the failures (60%) happened very early after being charged with domestic abuse. It suggested that more research is needed to identify any characteristics to make them prone to recidivate. Those who completed the SAFE programme were less likely to reoffend (10.6% versus 38.8% for those who did not complete SAFE). It argued that it was hard to know whether the lower recidivism rate for those participating in SAFE was due to the programme or because it reflected the lower LSI-R scores at the onset of treatment. Another aim of the study was to look at the possibility of predicting recidivism and the usefulness of the LSI-R. It found that the LSI-R added little to the prediction of recidivism among the sample of domestic abusers, with the LSI-R scores correctly predicting only 66% of the outcomes.
URI:	https://anrows.intersearch.com.au/anrowsjspui/handle/1/16515
ISSN:	0886-2605
Appears in Collections:	Journal Articles

Items in ANROWS library are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.