Male Parenting Attitudes and Batterer Intervention ...

Research Article

Male Parenting Attitudes and Batterer Intervention: Assessing Child Maltreatment Risk

Research on Social Work Practice 1-10 ª The Author(s) 2015 Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/1049731515579202 rsw.sagepub.com

Catherine E. Burnette1, Regardt J. Ferreira1,2, and Fred Buttell1

Abstract Objective: The purpose of the study was to investigate the relationship between parenting attitudes and intimate partner violence (IPV) perpetration and identify factors associated with program completion for a 26-week batterer intervention program (BIP). Method: The study employed a nonequivalent, control-group design (comparing program completers to dropouts) in a secondary analysis of 111 men court ordered to the BIP. Results: Correlational and logistic regression analysis indicated (1) a modest relationship between the parenting attitudes and the IPV perpetration, (2) a significant model for predicting parenting attitudes scores using number of children and racial group, and (3) BIP treatment completion could be successfully predicted by education. Conclusion: These findings reveal characteristics of male batterers, as they relate to parenting attitudes and provide preliminary evidence suggesting that men in treatment for IPV offenses endorse a host of negative parenting attitudes. Implications of these findings were explored and discussed. Keywords domestic violence, batterers, intimate partner violence, parenting attitude, revised conflict tactics scales, male offenders

Despite consistent research documenting the alarming co-occurrence between child maltreatment and intimate partner violence (IPV; Herrenkohl, Sousa, Tajima, Herrenkohl, & Moylan, 2008; Slep & O’Leary, 2005), the parenting attitudes of perpetrators of IPV are far less understood (Slep & O’Leary, 2005). Given parenting attitudes are intimately connected with actual parenting behaviors (Simmons, Lehmann, & Dia, 2009), this lack of understanding is particularly problematic. The co-occurrence of IPV and physical child abuse is a well-documented and pervasive social problem with far-reaching implications for children and families (Simmons et al., 2009). Reviews of the co-occurrence of physical child abuse and IPV place its prevalence among clinical samples at approximately 40%, with the base rate of co-occurrence in community samples being much less, at 6% (Appel & Holden, 1998). Renner and Slack (2006) reported a .52 correlation between childhood physical abuse and witnessing parental IPV in a sample of 1,005 low-income adult women. These rates vary greatly by sample with ranges from 40% to 91% in one study (Margolin & Gordis, 2003). A recent review reported the overlap between child abuse and IPV ranging between 45% and 75% (Holt, Buckley, & Whelan, 2008). Although IPV and child maltreatment tend to be studied separately, family violence tends to take multiple forms in the contexts in which it occurs. Using representative sampling of 453 families with young children, Slep and O’Leary (2005) reported that among aggressive families, multiple forms of

family violence (i.e., partner and parent–child) occurred 82% of the time (Slep & O’Leary, 2005). Relatedly, Ross (1996) reported that IPV significantly increased the risk of physical child abuse by the physically abusive spouse and that this relationship was stronger for husbands in the study. Because IPV tends to have differential impact on the parenting attitudes and practices of men and women (Margolin & Gordis, 2003), the scope of this research is limited to the parenting attitudes of men participating in a Batterer Intervention Program (BIP) for IPV. For the purpose of this research, IPV includes threats or acts of physical, sexual, and psychological violence by a current or former intimate partner (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2013), whereas child maltreatment can include child abuse (physical, sexual, and/or psychological abuse of child) and/or child neglect (failure to supervise and protect children from violence and/or failure to provide children basic physical, emotional, medical, and/or emotional needs; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2014).

1

School of Social Work, Tulane University, New Orleans, LA, USA Department of Social Work, University of the Free State, Bloemfontein, South Africa 2

Corresponding Author: Regardt J. Ferreira, School of Social Work, Tulane University, 127 Elk Place, New Orleans, LA 70112, USA. Email: [email protected]

Downloaded from rsw.sagepub.com by guest on April 12, 2015

2

Research on Social Work Practice

Consequences of Witnessing IPV and Child Maltreatment Both witnessing IPV and experiencing child abuse place children at risk for a host of detrimental consequences across their life course (Kitzmann, Gaylord, Holt, & Kenny, 2003). According to a meta-analysis (Wolfe, Crooks, Lee, McIntyreSmith, & Jaffe, 2003), children who experience child abuse in addition to witnessing IPV tend to have increased emotional and behavioral problems beyond those who only witness IPV. These problems can include (a) emotional: isolation, shame, guilt, fear, and low-self-esteem; (b) psychological: anxiety, post-traumatic stress disorder, and depression; (c) behavioral: school dropout, eating disorders, suicide attempts, violence, teen pregnancy, substance use, and delinquency; and (d) relational: insecure attachment, revictimization, violence perpetration, and impaired conflict resolution skills (Herrenkohl et al., 2008; Holt et al., 2008; Taylor, Guterman, Lee, & Rathouz, 2009). Moreover, children in violent contexts were 5 to 7 times more likely to experience childhood depression, anxiety, aggression, insecure attachment, and low self-esteem than children from nonviolent households (Cummings & Davies, 2010; SturgeApple, Skibo, & Davies, 2012). Given the extensive literature investigating the co-occurrence of IPV and child abuse, it is surprising how few studies examine the connections between IPV and parenting (Holden & Ritchie, 1991; Levendosky & Graham-Bermann, 2001). Appel and Holden (1998) explain the relatively little attention to the connection between these co-occurring forms of violence because research on IPV and child abuse have developed along distinct and largely nonintersecting trajectories. Given IPV and child abuse are common co-occurring types of family violence, a more holistic view of their interconnections is sorely needed (Appel & Holden, 1998; Finkelhor, Ormrod, & Turner, 2007; Margolin & Gordis, 2003).

Social Learning Theory and the Spillover Effect Social learning theory (Bandura, 1976) is useful in understanding the interconnections between parenting and IPV, as it can explain the spillover effect (transmission of parent conflict onto parent–child relations) through the mechanisms of modeling and legitimizing violence (Appel & Holden, 1998). For instance, violence may be modeled as a form of conflict resolution (among parents and parent–child relations), and violence may be legitimized as an acceptable or tolerated norm within families. Thus, if violence is used to solve conflict between couples, this method of conflict resolution may also be used for parent– child conflict. This directly relates to the ample evidence supporting the intergenerational transmission of violence across some families, where children who witness violence growing up are more likely to experience violence as adults (Holt et al., 2008). Indeed, the transfer of negative behavior and emotions across relationships has substantial empirical support (Erel & Burman, 1995; Margolin & Gordis, 2003). Parent conflict can spillover onto parent–child relations, the victimized parent may learn that violence is an effective way to control someone, or

IPV may increase the overall context of family stress, which in turn heightens the risk for punitive or harsh parenting (Appel & Holden, 1998; Simmons et al., 2009). It is important to note, not only does parental conflict tend to spillover onto parent–child relations so does parental harmony. Indeed, parents who are in harmony with each other are thought to be more emotionally available and sensitive to children’s needs, whereas conflict can impair parenting behaviors (Erel & Burman, 1995) and constrain the quality of the parent–child relationships (Erel & Burman, 1995; Levendosky & Graham-Bermann, 2001). In Erel and Burman’s (1995) metaanalysis of 68 studies, all indicated a significant and positive relationship between marital quality and the quality of the parent–child relationship, indicating a consistent and robust relationship between marital and parent–child relationships. A more recent review found that the quality of parenting was clearly impaired with households with IPV, through impairing parents’ mental health and thereby inhibiting parental sensitivity to children, impairing parent’s ability to maintain authority, safety, and stability for children, or heightening stress and placing children at risk for experiencing physical violence (Holt et al., 2008). IPV in households has also been associated with increased use of corporal punishment, which is a well-documented risk factor for child abuse (Simmons et al., 2009; Taylor et al., 2009; Taylor, Manganello, Lee, & Rice, 2010). Family stress levels can be important precursors for child abuse in IPV households. Margolin and Gordis (2003) found in a study of 177 families with small children that husband to wife aggression increased the risk for both husband and wife’s child abuse potential in the context of high parenting and financial stress but was not linked in the context of low stress. Moreover, wife-to-husband aggression was linked only to wives child abuse potential in the context of high stress (Margolin & Gordis, 2003). Importantly, under conditions of low stress, the potential for child abuse is no higher within families experiencing IPV than nonviolent families (Margolin & Gordis, 2003). For instance, IPV and maternal stress were both found to be risk factors for child maltreatment among a sample of 2,508 fragile families (Taylor et al., 2009).

Parenting Attitudes of Males Who Perpetrate IPV Given the lack of research investigating the topic of this research (parenting attitudes of male perpetrators of IPV), we extend our background to the most relevant available research: the parenting behaviors of fathers who have perpetrated IPV. Although important information differentiates parenting and step-parenting behaviors, because we focus on parenting attitudes, this information is beyond the scope of this article. Despite the demonstrable positive effect of involved fathers, they tend to be systematically left out of research and practice on parenting (Brown, Callahan, Strega, Walmsley, & Dominelli, 2009; Cameron, Coady, & Hoy, 2014; Edleson, 1999; Peled, 2000; Scott & Crooks, 2004). Indeed, fathers who are involved, supportive, and nurturing tend to have thriving children on


Burnette et al.

3

academic, emotional, and social domains (Dubowitz et al., 2001; Guille, 2004; Scott & Crooks, 2004). According to Appel and Holden’s (1998) review on the co-occurrence of IPV and child abuse, only 3 of 31 studies sampled fathers. The lack of attention to the parenting by fathers in IPV households has been noted in other research as a severe deficit in current understanding (Guille, 2004; Holt et al., 2008; Peled, 2000). Because research on fathers who perpetrate IPV is limited, guidelines to nurture positive relationships with children are virtually nonexistent (Peled, 2000; Scott & Crooks, 2004). The limited information that is available indicates that, in comparison with nonviolent fathers, violent fathers tend to have less involvement with children, are more likely to use negative child-rearing practices, may be manipulative and selfcentered, tend to undermine partners parenting efforts, are less consistent, and are more likely to use authoritarian parenting practices (Bancroft, Silverman, & Ritchie, 2011; Peled, 2000; Simmons et al., 2009). Other research suggests that fathers who perpetrate IPV tend to limit creativity and structure in children’s lives (Margolin & Gordis, 2003). These descriptions parallel findings in a qualitative study with 10 children, aged 8–12, regarding their perceptions of their fathers who have perpetrated IPV (Cater & Forssell, 2012); fathers were described as uninvolved and not responsible for their care, mothers providing the bulk of child care, and a lack of violence being seen as a ‘‘good-enough’’ father (Cater & Forssell, 2012). Yet, most offending fathers will continue to have contact with their children as co-parents, and children desire and can benefit from safe contact (Edleson, 1999; Guille, 2004). Thus, an urgent need exists for information on IPV and propensity for child abuse among males. Although both perpetrators and victims are at heightened risk for abusing their children (Appel & Holden, 1998), it is important to note that not all parents involved in IPV are aggressive to their children (Margolin & Gordis, 2003). IPV severity is one factor with implications for whether child abuse co-occurs and the pathways by which it occurs. M. A. Straus, Gelles, and Smith (1990) reported that fathers who severely and frequently abused their wives also abused their children 50% of the time. However, in comparison with nonabusive men, fathers exhibiting less severe levels of IPV were not at a heightened risk for also abusing children (M. A. Straus, Gelles, & Smith, 1990).

The Current Study First, IPV has been found to predict parenting attitudes regarding key factors predicting child abuse, including empathy toward children, role reversal, and attitudes toward corporal punishment (Meyers & Battistoni, 2003). Yet, the strength of the relationship between IPV and parenting attitudes are less well understood, and they have been found to differ by gender (Margolin & Gordis, 2003; Simmons et al., 2009; Taylor et al., 2009). Therefore, to uncover whether this population tends to have higher risk parenting attitudes, this research will investigate the parenting attitudes of male perpetrators of IPV.

Second, using social learning theory to examine the spillover effect, this research will investigate whether there is a relationship between parenting attitudes and IPV. Third, given the saliency of financial and family stress and the cultural context, important variables have been recommended for research on the co-occurrence of IPV and child abuse, namely, socioeconomic information and ethnic/racial information (Appel & Holden, 1998). Financial hardships from low income or unemployment are known risk factors for family violence (Holt et al., 2008; Margolin & Gordis, 2003; Swan & Snow, 2006). Childhood trauma and abuse are consistently found to be very high for both men and women who use violence, and research accounting for this significant background is needed (Guille, 2004; Simmons et al., 2009; M. A. Straus et al., 1990; Swan & Snow, 2006). Childhood trauma is particularly salient, given research has found this construct to be predictive of favorable attitudes toward violence toward spouses and children (Markowitz, 2001; Meyers & Battistoni, 2003). Additionally, younger age is also a risk factor for partner abuse (Swan & Snow, 2006). Thus, in addition to examining whether parenting attitudes predicate IPV perpetration, this research analyzes key demographic variables drawn from the IPV literature as part of its inquiry. Finally, this study will investigate whether a wide constellation of demographic, self-reported violence, and self-reported parenting attitudes is predictive of BIP completion. With the known spillover relationship between IPV and child maltreatment, a reduction in IPV perpetration is one potential way to concomitantly reduce child maltreatment. Although research has documented mixed results as to the effectiveness of the BIP program, Jones, D’Agostino, Gondolf, and Heckert’s (2004) seminal research with 633 batterers and partners across three geographic locales found that completion of the BIP program reduced the likelihood of perpetrator reassault by 33% in the 15-month follow-up and almost half of the court-ordered men. Thus, completion of the BIP seems to be an important predictor of IPV reoccurrence. Given its potential implications in reducing IPV, a known risk factor for child maltreatment, this research will investigate which factors predict BIP completion.

Purpose of the Study In summary, using a sample of male participants in a BIP, the purposes of this study were to (a) add to the existing but scant literature on the parenting attitudes of male perpetrators of IPV; (b) investigate whether there is a relationship between parenting attitudes and IPV perpetration; (c) explore whether demographic factors and parenting attitudes predict IPV perpetration; and, finally, (d) investigate the ability of demographic variables, parenting attitudes, and IPV perpetration to differentiate between completers and noncompleters of a 26-week BIP program. Our specific hypothesis, informed by social learning theory and the spillover effect, include: Hypothesis 1: Higher risk parenting attitudes for child maltreatment will be associated with greater IPV perpetration.


4


X

O

--------------O Figure 1. Nonequivalent, control group design. Note. In Figure 1, X represents completion of the batterer intervention program (BIP) and the bottom group represents program dropouts. For the purpose of this study, the term dropout refers to those clients who completed the intake interview but failed to complete the entire treatment program. They serve as a nonequivalent control group for treatment completers which are represented on the top of the diagram.

Hypothesis 2: Higher risk parenting attitudes will predict greater levels of IPV perpetration.

Method Data Collection The present study employed a posttest-only design with nonequivalent groups (Cook & Campbell, 1979), which is diagrammed and described in Figure 1. The current study sample included all men referred to the BIP at the Domestic Abuse Center (DAC), a nonprofit agency in Columbia, South Carolina, between the periods of June 2013 and December 2013. By virtue of their inclusion in the BIP program, all men had by definition perpetuated some form of IPV, making this sample an ideal match for this study. Clients attended the DAC outside this date range were excluded.

Sampling and Procedures The current study utilized a secondary analysis of data collected by the DAC. Since 1982, the DAC has been providing batterer intervention services based on agency and court-based referrals. The majority of the 111 sampled BIP participants (41%) were referred by a summary court processing misdemeanors, criminal domestic violence court (20%), or were participants in a pretrial intervention (PTI) program (25%). A small percentage (10%) reported being referred from a governmental agency, such as probation or Department of Social Services, or listed ‘‘other’’ as the referral source. It should be noted that each of these referral sources has a different level of client supervision and different consequences for program dropout. The BIP is cognitive–behavioral in orientation and is consistent in organization and focus to those programs described in the literature (Buttell & Carney, 2005). The intervention program is a structured, intensive, 26-week, group treatment program that focuses primarily on anger management and skills development. These programs attempt to modify the thinking of perpetrators of IPV and address their use of aggression in intimate relationships (Buttell & Carney, 2005). The intervention program incorporates three phases, namely, (a) orientation and intake interview—2 sessions, (b) psychoeducational

classes—20 sessions, and (c) group therapy regarding termination—4 sessions. Groups consist of approximately 15 batterers, male only, and meet one night each week for approximately 2 hr. This batterer treatment program incorporates confrontation, therapy, and educational components. In this setting, the common proximal events of domestic violence are directly addressed with clients, and they are given an opportunity to make changes that will positively affect their personal relationships with others. Prior to participating in the BIP, clients completed the following assessment process in the first two intake sessions, which is focal to this research. The purpose of the assessment process is to assist agency staff in creating a pretreatment profile of clients. During these sessions, the DAC staff interviewed clients, collecting demographic information as well as completing the following two instruments, namely, The revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2), (M. A. Straus, Hamby, Boney-McCoy, & Sugarman, 1996) and the Adult-Adolescent Parenting Inventory–2 (AAPI-2; Bavolek & Keene, 2010). Researchers received deidentified and anonymous data, protecting client privacy and anonymity, ensuring individual responses could not be linked to client identities.

Measures Along with the demographic variables, including race, relationship status (single, married, unmarried, divorced, and separated), number of children, Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE), educational level, employment status, military background, and referral source, which were collected as part of the DAC intake procedures, the primary measures for this study included the CTS2 and AAPI-2. The revised CTS2. The CTS2 (M. A. Straus et al., 1996) is the most recent version of the original CTSs (M. Straus, 1979, 1997), which is a widely used self-report measure of psychological and physical assaults as well as negotiation in domestic relationships (M. A. Straus, 1996). The CTS2 has been used in a variety of settings with individuals from varying races, cultures, and ethnic background, including the minority groups represented in this study, that is, African Americans (e.g., Cazenave & Straus, 1979; DuRant, Cadenhead, Pendergrast, Slavens, & Linder, 1994; Hampton, Gelles, & Harrop, 1989) and Hispanics (Kaufman, Jasinski, & Aldarondo, 1994). According to M. A. Straus, Hamby, Boney-McCoy, and Sugarman (1996), the CTS2 consistently demonstrates sound psychometric properties, with internal consistency reliability ranging from .79 to .95. Moreover, the measure has shown construct validity in a number of studies (M. A. Straus et al., 1996). According to M. A. Straus et al. (1996), the CTS2 was designed to measure the range and frequency of tactics used in response to conflict with a family member. The CTS2 is a comprehensive 39-item (78 question), self-reported inventory designed to measure five scales, namely, Negotiation (which includes two subscales, emotional and cognitive), as well as Psychological Aggression, Physical Assault, Sexual Coercion,


Burnette et al.

5

and Injury, each of which include two subscales, (minor and severe). Negotiation includes the actions taken to resolve conflict through discussion, psychological aggression measures nonverbal aggressive acts, physical assault includes physical violence, sexual coercion focuses on coercing a partner into unwanted sexual activity, and , finally, injury includes partnerinduced physical injury (M. A. Straus, 1996). Respondents rate each item for the aforementioned scales on a 7-point Likert-type style frequency scale (0 ¼ this has never happened before, 1 ¼ once in the past year, 2 ¼ Twice in the past year, 3 ¼ 3–5 time in the past year, 4 ¼ 6–10 times in the past year, 5 ¼ 11–20 times in the past year, 6 ¼ more than 20 times in the past year, and 7 ¼ not in the past year, but it did happen before). To create interpretable scores, Values 1 and 2 remained the same, and Values 3–6 were recoded to be the midpoints (3 ¼ 4, 4 ¼ 8, 5 ¼ 15, 6 ¼ 25; M. A. Straus et al., 1996). AAPI-2. The AAPI-2 is an inventory to assess the parenting and child-rearing attitudes of adult and adolescent parent and preparent populations (Bavolek & Keene, 2010). Based on the documented parenting and child-rearing behaviors of abusive parents, the AAPI-2 assesses the level of agreement or disagreement with maladaptive parenting behaviors (Bavolek & Keene, 2010). Based on responses, the AAPI provides an indicator of high-, medium-, or low-risk parenting attitudes in relationship with child abuse and neglect (Bavolek & Keene, 2010). The AAPI-2 consists of five scales assessing parenting attitudes that are thought to be associated with cases of child abuse and neglect (Bavolek & Keene, 2010), namely, (a) inappropriate expectations of children, (b) parental lack of empathetic awareness toward children’s needs, (c) strong belief in the use of corporal punishment as a means of discipline; (d) parent–child role reversal, and (e) oppressing children’s power and independence. With over 20 years of research, the AAPI-2 is regarded as a validated and reliable inventory of parenting attitudes relating to child abuse and neglect (Bavolek & Keene, 2010).

Results The sample of 111 men consisted of 51.4% (n ¼ 57) Caucasians and 43.2% (n ¼ 48) African Americans and was made up by a small percentage of Other (i.e., Latino/Hispanic, Asian, and American Indian) 5.4% (n ¼ 6). Caucasians had the highest percentage of program completion with 78.9% (n ¼ 45), compared to African American 72.9% (n ¼ 35). The mean age for Caucasian men in the study was 37.47 years (SD ¼ 10.49), compared to 33.5 years (SD ¼ 11.29) for African American men and 38.50 years (SD ¼ 10.17) for Other men. Participants receiving a high school degree or greater were highest among African Americans 68.7% (n ¼ 33) followed by Caucasians 64.9% (n ¼ 37). Employment was higher among Caucasians with 80.7% (n ¼ 46) being employed, compared to 64.6% (n ¼ 31) for African Americans. Regarding relationship status, Caucasians 49.2% (n ¼ 28) reported they were either living

with a partner or were married, compared to 41.7% (n ¼ 20) among African Americans. Reported experiences of ACE were highest among Caucasians with 17.5% (n ¼ 10) compared to 4.2% (n ¼ 2) for African Americans. Among the sample, only 2.7 % (n ¼ 3) tested within the low-risk category for the AAPI-2, with roughly 55% (n ¼ 61) testing in the medium risk category and 42.3% (n ¼ 47) within the high-risk category for the AAPI-2. Therefore, given the very small number of men in the low-risk parenting category for parenting, the remainder of the analyses used the AAPI medium and highrisk groups (n ¼ 108). The demographic characteristics of the sample are presented in Table 1.

Hypothesis 1: Investigate Relationship Between Parenting Attitudes and IPV Perpetration To address the first hypothesis of this study, a point-biserial correlation was conducted. The point-biserial correlation coefficient (rpb) is a special case of the Pearson R and is used when one variable is dichotomous. Similar to the Pearson R, pointbiserial values range from 1 to þ1. In the present study, the AAPI-2 variable was recoded into a high-risk and medium category of parenting behavior. The point-biserial correlation was conducted with the AAPI-2 risk category variable and the five subscales of CTS2 (Negotiation, Psychological Aggression, Physical Assault, Sexual Coercion, and Injury). The only significant point-biserial correlation was for sexual coercion, indicating a weak positive correlation between high-risk parenting behavior and sexual coercion (rpb ¼ .189, p ¼ .050).

Hypothesis 2: Parenting Attitudes as a Predictor of IPV Perpetration To address the second hypothesis, a standard multiple regression was conducted. For the purpose of the analysis, the AAPI-2 low-risk group (n ¼ 3) was removed from the sample. A standard multiple regression investigated whether demographic variables and parenting factors (age, relationship status, referral, education, children, employment status, military service, referral status, race, AAPI-2, and ACE) resulted in an increased level of scoring on the revised CTS2 for men (Model 1). Results of the standard multiple regression analysis indicated that the model was not significant. The estimated coefficients of the multiple regression model art presented in Table 2. To further investigate the differential impact of demographics and conflict tactics for male batterers in a community-based BIP, the current study employed logistic regression to predict high- or medium-risk parenting attitudes. The model consisted of 13 demographic and conflict tactic predictors (age, program completion, education, children, employment, race, referral, CTS2 Negotiation, CTS2 Psychological Aggression, CTS2 Physical Assault, CTS2 Injury, CTS2 Sexual Coercion, and military). The study employed an analysis strategy that allowed for simultaneous entry of the independent variables. All assumptions of logistic regression were met. The estimated


6


Table 1. Demographic Characteristics.

Table 2. Standard Multiple Regression Analysis for Demographic and Parenting Predictors of the Revised Conflict Tactics Scales (CTS2).

Program Participants (N ¼ 111) Characteristic

Completers % (n)

Dropouts % (n)

Total % (N) 100 (111)

Client Status Race Caucasian African American Other Age SD Relationship status Single Married Unmarried partners Divorced Separated Children 0 1 2 3 4 5 11 Education level