'I asked abusive men's wives if they'd been violent and got a lot of grief for it from the DV establishment'
June 29th, 2009 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families
I recently attended the excellent Los Angeles domestic violence conference "From Ideology to Inclusion 2009: New Directions in Domestic Violence Research and Intervention."
The conference featured many domestic violence dissidents--researchers and clinicians who do not believe that the mainstream domestic violence establishment and its "men as perpetrators/women as victims" conceptual framework is properly serving those involved in family violence.
Lonnie Hazelwood, MSHP, LCDC, CCCJS, who has worked in the domestic violence and chemical dependency fields for over 25 years, began receiving his training in domestic violence in the late 1970s. He explained:
I would ask abusive men's wives if they had been violent and I got a lot of grief for it by from others in the domestic violence establishment, but I persisted. I found that many of the abused women were also violent. I was very surprised by this. The women readily admitted that their use of violence. Violence was fairly even between men and women.
I began to do "partner contact monitoring" to see if the men in our programs continued to abuse, and also if the women continued to abuse.
Hazelwood noted that many of these couples were mutually abusive, and needed couples counseling. He explained:
Feminists and the domestic violence shelters have been very effective in passing laws to prohibit couples counseling and programs which use gender inclusive strategies. Texas may soon be banning some of the programs I am currently doing.
Hazelwood also said that about half of family violence -- both partner abuse and child abuse -- is "associated" with substance abuse. He explained that "although for most people, substances are not causative of violence or abuse, there are a significant minority where violence ends as soon as the substance abuse ends."
The feminist domestic violence establishment has correctly noted that being drunk or on drugs is certainly no excuse for committing abuse. However, this has been taken too far, and many clinicians complain that substance abuse as a causative factor in domestic violence is not addressed seriously enough.
To read all reports from the Conference, please click here.
From Ideology to Inclusion 2009 featured some of the world's leading experts on domestic violence, many of whom serve on the Editorial Board of the new peer-reviewed academic journal, Partner Abuse, published by Springer Publishing Company. The conference was presented by the California Alliance for Families & Children and co-sponsored by The Family Violence Treatment & Education Association. Some of you may remember that I also wrote extensively about the 2008 conference--to learn more, click here.
"));
19 queries. 0.335 seconds.
June 29th, 2009 at 10:33 pm
Glenn I think this is an important concept to remember for balancing the arguments in the DV/IP analysis. The fact is, some couples develop violent habits when under stress, and, like most of society's ills, this is exacerbated or instigated by the use of drugs or alcohol. It's not news, and yet it is. We know it, and yet we need to hear it. It is begun by one, but it's very much mutual. We need to begin to look closely at the issue, the causes, and accountability for both instigating violence, and perpetuating it. Thanks for that reminder.
June 29th, 2009 at 11:40 pm
brilliant. 'It is begun by one' - need I ask who you think that usually is?
June 30th, 2009 at 6:23 am
It is false to characterise as "dissident" the DV/IPV scientific research community.
That DV/IPV is 'non-gendered' [sic] and actually more FEMALE-perpetrated is the CONSENSUS position, and had been for many years.
It is only the DV 'advocacy' lobby that pretends ideologically that only men can be perpetrators.
Of course, it is the later that gets the attention of journalists. That's what lobbies are for. They misrepresent any science they bother to cite to further their political goals.
This fraud has been so virulent that scientists have had to gather together to combat it.
I think that much more of this sort of anti-advocacy rallying by scientists will be happening as the scientific community wakes up to the great political fraud of PC-totalitarianism generally, and extreme-feminism in particular; as they see the need to increase their clout in a period where funding for research is in short supply.
Government funding has often gone to thinly-veiled PC-fascist advocates who are known to the Government as supporters of the lines they want to push, and this is money that goes out of the pot that would otherwise go to bona fide social scientists. So it is that the social scientists proper are starting to wise-up.
June 30th, 2009 at 7:43 am
Shhhhhhhhhh. Of course you got a lot of grief.
You are effecting their monopoly on domestic violence which also ultimately effects their funding.
Oh, they so don't want this brought into the light do they?
Great job Glenn.
People who make their money through government funding don't want this brought into the public eye. They are invested in the monopoly not the truth.
June 30th, 2009 at 8:43 am
I protect whom I feel needs protection. It is so upsetting to see and hear about woman abusing the system to get out. The couple counseling is a wonderful idea for DV. From there, you can go on to either reconcile your relationship or move on to a seperation/divorce. Perfect example is my brother - he and his wife became house-mates and were going to divorce after their daughter graduated (3 years). She failed 10th grade, now make it (4 yrs). Both my brother and his wife are abusive to eachother. They both have faults that push the other to the limit. We were shocked when he was issued temp PFA papers (she requested child support and sole custody and household payments). Needless to say, we got him a good lawyer - he receives joint physical custody, pays the CS per Nelson formula, and was able to move out without being liable for apt/utility payments.
June 30th, 2009 at 9:09 am
Claims of abuse are the magic "Get out of Jail, Free" card for women. You don't have to prove it, and you can just say you're concerned about the *potential* for violence.
June 30th, 2009 at 9:52 am
Steve Moxon says "It is false to characterise as "dissident" the DV/IPV scientific research community."
My use of the term "dissident" is based on the fact that the conference presenters are (loosely) akin to the "Soviet dissidents" of the 1970s (and earlier). Soviet dissidents stood up to and challenged the regime and its ideology--an ideology which was supposed to serve the people but in the end served only the state bureaucracy. An ideology perpetuated through control, not truth.--GS
June 30th, 2009 at 10:15 am
Hi Glenn
Yes, your usage of the term 'dissident' is apposite, though I'd suggest only up to a point.
In the Soviet Union almost all scientists towed the line or at least paid it lip service. The dissidents were notable for being such a tiny minority, as the label 'dissident' actually denotes. So to use the term more than just strongly implies that the science community in the main has been backing up the ideologues, when in fact it has done quite the opposite for some time now, albeit with some exceptions. [Perhaps I'm minimising those, though?]
This is what is most striking about the topic: that it starkly shows the imperviousness of the political/media/education 'classes' to any sense: a charge that justifiably can be transfered to them re many other men/women topics.
I think, though, that I should have made my point in a more supportive way. Sorry about that.
Do please keep up your excellent website; it is really important.
June 30th, 2009 at 3:10 pm
Glenn and Steve,
it may also be the case that one of you is talking about social science, and the other mostly real science. That is just an observation on my part, not agreement or disagreement.
June 30th, 2009 at 5:52 pm
About drugs and alochol as "causative." I used to be a drunk, 20 years ago. After I quit I want to lots of AA meetings. Later on I realized that the AA program, when properly done, is in essence a treatment program for narcissistic personality disorder. Habitual intoxication is indeed a severe symptom, and has immediate violent consequences frequently, yet it is not the "cause" of DV. Narcissistic personalities are addicted to immediate gratification and have a difficult time resisting temptation an d regulating their own emotions. In AA terms, a drunk who has quit drinking is not really "sober," but is merely a "dry drunk" who has to invest time and engergy to genuinely recover over time.
Promiscuity is a major symptom of narcissistic and other personality disorders that is rarely discussed in the contest of Fathers' Rights/Divorce/DV/Fake DV/Rape/Fake Rape. If you have 2 narcissists you are going to have trouble. Period. Promiscuity, drugs, alcohol, entertainment consumption, soft-porn entertainment addiction (from childhood onwards, it the bombardmentis incessant), shopping addiction, addiction to self-help new age crap, celebrity worship (including worship of the "Big Zero" ("O")), "me"-ist career worship, passive TV consumption, self-pity, victim fetishism, utopian ideological fantasies -- all this stuff works against the development of the self-regulating personality. Child abusers are people who cannot regulate their own affect (immature personalities).
June 30th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
This article is extremely true and relevant - thankyou!!!
July 1st, 2009 at 3:46 am
"So it is that the social scientists proper are starting to wise-up."
guess my comment above is hosed.
July 1st, 2009 at 4:41 am
The very reason Shattered Men exists today is because a handicapped woman in England posted on several feminist forums asking why she was abused as a child. These posts were removed and she was banned from the forums because she dared ask about an abusive...mother! She wrote to NOW and was told she was a liar because mothers do not abuse their children.
This woman did her own research and created a website which I later found and it opened my eyes. Shattered Men is a direct result of this woman being told that mothers are not abusive.
If we do not look at both sides. we will only make the problems worse.
July 1st, 2009 at 9:23 pm
Hi Glenn, I seriously think you are one of the greatest men to live among our generation. I seriously love you for what you do online and off-line. Plus...
I wrote about you in my last assignment for environmental business studies. And I passed the paper too with my professor saying about you, "This is something local governments need to enact".
But I also asked what New Zealand was doing about inclusion to the University who is the main on DV. And I was told we and you and all of us are a definite ground movement on our way up.
Plus I was given this link as something worth seeing.
http://thisweekwithbarackobama.blogspot.com/2009/04/obamas-speech-at-national-academy-of.html
I hope it helps you.
July 2nd, 2009 at 4:10 am
[...] 'I asked abusive men's wives if they'd been violent and got a lot of grief for it ... [...]