MenWeb logoMenWeb   

http://www.batteredmen.com/batpetka.htm

Battered Men - The Hidden Side of Domestic Violence
Gender Polarization in Domestic Violence Programs

Police Training Programs

Account and Accountability

PATROL CONSTABLES' PERCEPTIONS OF WIFE ASSAULT SENSITIVITY TRAINING,
A QUALITATIVE EVALUATION

Executive Summary
© June 1998 by by Theresa Petkau

Other Resources

 



Smiling policeman stabs a man through the heart
Smiling policeman stabs a man through the heart with a pen
a "cartoon" from a Canadian police training manual




Rhetorical strategies:
  • recounting atrocity stories or dramatic accounts based on first-person testimony
  • attributing reports of the victim's problematic behaviour (e.g., alcohol or drug addiction, verbal aggression) to effects of victimization
  • dismissing accounts of the victim's violence as self-defense or retaliation
  • rejecting any explanation for the offender's violence (e.g., alcoholism, drug addiction, psychological disorders) except that of a desire to maintain power and control over the female partner
  • increasing women's perception of their stake in a solution to wife assault by suggesting that an abusive personality lurks behind even the most outwardly respectable man
  • constructing a continuum on which are found other forms of violence against women
  • subsuming the issue of wife assault under the more general category of male violence against women and children
  • disregarding the discrepancy between an appeal for recognition of minor levels of violence as situated on a continuum, and a focus on extreme levels of violence in atrocity stories
  • overlooking the contradiction between the typification of extreme levels of violence in atrocity stories and minor levels of violence reflected in the majority of police reports
  • ignoring the inconsistency between the claim that all women are at risk and the typification of the middle class victim
  • discrediting measurements used in rival research
  • focusing on disconfirming cases in rival explanations only
  • criticizing rival explanations for perpetuating myths, proffering excuses, revictimizing the victim, and/or overlooking attention to root causes
  • appealing to nonfalsifiable claims but rejecting similar logic when appealed to by rival claims-makers
  • appealing to statistics from carefully selected studies to validate claims
  • selectively interpreting data in a manner consistent with the feminist account
  • ignoring, discounting, or overlooking findings inconsistent with the feminist account.
Regarded in this manner an argument can be made for wife assault claims-making as a social construction fraught with oversimplifications, dramatizations, and contradictions.

This study, undertaken in 1995/96, is a qualitative evaluation of in-service wife assault sensitivity training provided to front-line police officers. The stakeholder perspective sought is that of patrol constables. Data collection included the following: (1) open-ended one-on-one interviews with forty-three police officers including four administrative trainers, six sergeants, thirty-one patrol constables, and two detective constables; (2) attendance at two wife assault sensitivity training sessions, one at the local level and the other at the provincial level; (3) thirty hours participation in four police ride-alongs; and (4) engagement in numerous inforrmal conversations with officers during frequent station visits over the six-month data collection stage. A symbolic interactionist approach was adopted in order to understand patrol constables' total environment(including social, cultural, and political conditions) that surrounds and impinges on them.

Findings demonstrate that patrol constables largely were unpersuaded by the training claims which for the most part were informed by the feminist perspective of wife assault, one of two major competing sociological perspectives on this issue. Application of a contextual constructionist approach to the training was usefull in informing an under-standing of constables' lack of receptivity. When applied to the feminist account of wife assault, this approach--which assumes a subjective rather than objective definition of social problems--reveals that presentation of the following issues are central to the construction of wife assault as a social problem: wife assault as a category separate from other forms of intimate violence; a one-way victimization interpretive framework with its mutually exclusive categories of victim and offender; images of good (i.e~, victim) and evil(i.e., offender); fostering of sympathy worthiness for the victim and condemnation worthiness for the offender; violence characterized by the dynamics of power and control as well as escalation; termination of the abusive relationship as a process; revictimization by a patriarchal social system; wife assault as not a lower class phenomenon; widespread occurrence of wife assault; and focus on the conseqnences of wife assault.

A contextual constructionist analysis further noted that to convince audiences of, obtain support for, and thwart challenges to this particular construction, wife assault claims-makers adopt several rhetorical strategies, some of which include the following:

1 recounting atrocity stories or dramatic accounts based on first-person testimony

2.attributing reports of the victim's problematic behaviour (such as alcoholism, drug addiction, verbal aggression, inattentive mothering, and self-blame) to effects of victimization

3. dismissing accounts of the victim's violence as self-defense or retaliation

4.rejecting any explanation for the offender's violence (including alcoholism, drug addiction, psychological disorders, and so forth) except that of a desire to maintain power and control over the female partner (present or former)

5.increasing women's perception of their stake in a solution to wife assault by suggesting that an abusive personality lurks behind even the most outwardly respectable man

6.constructing a continuum on which are found other forms of violence against women

7.subsuming the issue of wife assault under the more general category of male violence against women and children

8.disregarding the discrepancy between, on the one hand, an appeal for recognition of minor levels of violence as situated on a continuum and, on the other hand, a focus on extreme levels of violence in atrocity stories

9.overlooking the contradiction between the typification of extreme levels of violence in atrocity stories and minor levels of violence reflected in the majority of police reports

10.ignoring the inconsistency between the claim that all women are at risk and the typification of the middle class victim

11.discrediting measurements used in rival research

12.focusing on disconfirming cases in rival explanations only

13.criticizing rival explanations for perpetuating myths, proffering excuses, revictimizing the victim, and/or overlooking attention to root causes

14.appealing to nonfalsifiable claims but rejecting similar logic when appealed to by rival claims-makers

15.appealing to statistics from carefully selected studies to validate claims

16.selectively interpreting data in a manner consistent with the feminist account

17.ignoring, discounting, or overlooking findings inconsistent with the feminist account. Regarded in this manner an argument can be made for wife assault claims-making as a social construction fraught with oversimplifications, dramatizations, and contradictions.

When this claims-making activity in the form of wife assault sensitivity training is directed to a patrol constable audience, acceptance by officers of the feminist account of wife assault is hindered further by police organizational culture in general and the patrol constable subculture in particular. Of the numerous factors related to the larger institutional reality which appeared to shape constables' rejection of the training claims, some include the following:

1.lack of dependence on images constructed by wife assault claims-makers because of constables' professional exposure to wife assault situations

2.professional exposure to wife assault situations that (a) afforded constables with perceptions inconsistent with those constructed in the feminist account (such as the claim for escalation, the simplistic victim/offender dichotomy, and the merit of a priori status assignment of victim and offender), (b) routinely confronted constables with numerous perceived unintended consequences of the wife assault mandatory charge and arrest policies, and (c) gave rise to constables contesting ownership of the social problem of wife assault in order to make their own claims as holders of expert knowledge in this area

3. a patrol constable subculture characterized by a general distrust of civilians and a larger police culture ideologically committed to neutrality, the latter two of which contributed to, first, constables' objections to the perceived biased wife assault mandatory charge and arrest policies and, second, constables' resistance to the training's a proir status assignment of victim and offender

4.police procedure which requires constables to investigate in a disconnected manner each allegation of a specific violent act (rather than consider the impact of various acts in the context of the alleged abusive relationship as proposed in the feminist account)

5.difficulty in establishing grounds for psychological harm in wife assault as well as delegitimation of psychological abuse vis-a-vis police administration's sanctioned nonenforcement of these types of charges

6.constables' structured inability to fully enforce police policies and procedures in a police organization deemed by constables as extraordinarily accountable, increasingly open to scrutiny, and devoid of administrative support

7.internal police procedures (such as undue administrative monitoring of wife assault/domestic violence reports as well as instituting sanctions concerning charging males only) which persistently exacerbated accountability concerns and gave rise to a perceived need for "protective posturing;" i.e., an approach adopted by constables whereby they assess situations based on the worst case scenario and organize their responses to organizational dictates based on those assessments

8.patrol constable subculture's lack of regard for not just wife assault statistics but statistical reporting in general, the latter of which is regarded by constables as a function of state policies, administrative sanctions, and the patrol constable subculture

9 legitimacy crisis on behalf of the trainers (both administrative police officers and shelter workers) caused by various internal procedures and protocols as well as the historical administration/front-line chasm and the long-standing hostility between shelter workers and patrol constables

10.patrol constable subculture's high value given to common sense street knowledge and low value given to standardized rules and procedures

11.structure of recruit training which reinforces at the outset of a constable's career the importance of street-level experience

12.patrol constables' perception of training in general as an accountability weapon used by administration against the front line.

Theoretical Contributions

In noting the foregoing, the following theoretical contributions are made:

1. Support for the usefullness of applying a contextual constructionist perspective to training in general and sensitivity training in particular

2. Support for the argument that policies often work better in theory than in practice inasmuch as policies, designed on the basis of social problem images, often are based on extreme examples and do not reflect the complexities of social life

3. support for the argument that the _street_ (or "shop floor") rather than the classroom not only reflects the final arena for learning but also structures experiences of workers in general and patrol constables in particular--independent of any formal training

4. support for the position that workplace training needs to be considered in the context of workplace learning

5.challenge to the utility of workplace sensitivity training in substantive attitude change.

In summary, claims-making attempts in the training to replace constables' subjective definitions of wife assault with official (read feminist) definitions were unsuccessfull. Patrol constables' rejection of the feminist account of wife assault largely stemmed from workplace accountability concerns as well as constables' claims to define their own account of the violence. This latter account, although rooted in constables' widespread professional exposure to intimate violence, is afforded no legitimacy in a politically charged environment where (at least in Ontario) power currently belongs to the feminist movement to define both what occurs in intimate violence as well as suggest solutions. This power extends to feminists' ability to control the content of wife assault sensitivity training and then label as insensifive any groups which do not support the feminist view--even though, as outlined earlier, this view can be criticized on several grounds. In revealing the political realities of the claims-making process involved in sensitivity training as well as the myriad factors which can impinge upon and frustrate that process, this study challenges the popular view of sensitivity training as a panacea for attitude change in the workplace.

Implications for Further Research

The study's discussions on possible unintended consequences of policies mandating charge and arrest in cases involving allegations of wife assault hopefully will give impetus to researching this issue with patrol constables from other police services. In the event similar findings are obtained, a province-wide evaluation of these policies appears to be in order.

Other areas for further research include examining the following: (1) ways in which patrol constables resist mandatory directives; (2) processes by which constables' perceptions of parties' accounts get reinterpreted into written accounts suitable for administrative monitoring; (3) extent to which patrol constables encounter alcohol and female aggression when responding to domestic calls; (4) victims' perception of police response; and (5) effects of standardized rules in policing. As well, given that patrol constables routinely confront domestically violent situations in a manner unlike any other professional groups connected with this issue, further articulation of front-line officers' perceptions and understandings is recommended. In my opinion, these studies would be usefull in contributing to the theoretical debate regarding domestic violence in general and wife assault in particular.

Overall, it is hoped that this undertaking provides an opportunity to better understand both what is involved in claims-making about wife assault as well as what accounts for the perspective of patrol constables who daily are faced with what they perceive to be inconsistencies between their lived experience and the foregoing claims. It also is hoped that this evaluation will lead to more effective training of patrol constables regarding their understanding of; and response to, domestic violence.

Recommendations

Based on this study's findings, several recommendations regarding wife assault sensitivity training are offered, some of which include:

1.Training needs to be adapted to a patrol constable audience. This adaptation requires consideration not only of the apparent contradiction between officer neutrality and a prior status assignments of victim and offender, but also administration's awareness of and responsibility for effects on front-line personnel of possible inconsistencies between written policies and implicit sanctions regarding constable violation.

2.Avoid making singular claims for truth. To this end, there needs to be an acknowledgment that wife assault sensitivity training is based on only one of several competing perspectives on intimate violence.

3.Clearly state the goals of the training as well as what is expected of patrol constables.

4.Avoid adopting the rhetoric of myths unless a direct link is made to the relevant perspective from which the myths originate.

5.Include speakers with other theoretical orientations about wife assault/domestic violence as well as experts on victimology; this approach should encourage a more free exchange of ideas.

6.Minimize reliance on the use of statistical information to support training claims.

7.Eliminate the use of wife assault training videos adapted for general audiences.

S.Provide constables with concise written guidelines on what constitutes reasonable grounds in cases involving allegations of domestic violence and wife assault.

9.Where available, have victims (female and male) discuss their perception of police response, both positive and negative.

10.Insofar as legitimacy of trainers is critical, two options suggest themselves: (a) replace existing trainers with those who currently hold legitimacy with patrol constables such as front-line supervisors; or (b) examine those areas where existing trainers' legitimacy is undermined with the intent of eliminating or reducing these areas. In connection with the first recommendation, a poll of constables' views might be usefull. With regard to the latter recommendation, the following is suggested: (a) police trainers no longer undertake investigations of wife assault/domestic violence complaints involving sworn members; (b) expand police trainers' role to include front-line work with constables; (c) amend protocol with shelters in order to establish front-line sergeants as liaisons with shelters when information from and/or access to shelters is required; (d) have shelter workers participate in police ride-alongs, and alternately, have constables spend time at shelters; (e) include patrol constables in police training of shelter workers.

11.Encourage and document discussion around perceived consequences of any mandatory policy (including the wife assault charge policy) for the purpose of identifying and resolving problematic areas. If necessary, share concerns with other police services in order to work towards solutions, the latter of which may necessitate communication with state authorities.

12. Include patrol constables in police workshops about domestic/wife assault as well as ralated community discussions where police involvement is requested.

13. Given the move towards national consistency in police officer training, share these research findings with other police services across Canada.

For the most part, constables uniformly regarded rigid black-and-white policies dictating mandatory charge and arrest as an ineffective response to wife assault insofar as the policies purportedly thwarted a sensitive response to wife assault calls, first, by overlooking individual dynamics within each family, second. by ignoring wishes of the parties involved, and, third, by disallowing possibly more effective approaches. As well, officers criticized these policies on the basis that they (1) deterred women nonsupportive of charges from seeking help. (2) in some cases, negatively impacted upon the family unit as well as the accused by burdening already stressed families and leading, in many cases to their breakdown, (3) acted as a powerful tool in the hands of vindictive women, (4) gave rise to charges which officers considered unwarranted, and (5) resulted in unnecessary substantial costs to the criminal justice system in general and the police in particular. Officers also directed criticisms at the wife assault charge and arrest policies for negating their helping role, hindering their investigative role, violating their keen sense of justice, forcing a compromise of their sense of ethics and fairness, thwarting professional development of intuitiveness, contributing to the move towards rote policing, and serving as yet another example of administration's tacit sanctioning of policy violations (by virtue of staffing levels supposedly insufficient to allow for unabridged adherence to policies).

Related: What's Wrong with the "Duluth Model"?. It blames and shames men. It's based on ideology, not science. It ignores drinking, drugs and pathology. It ignores domestic violence by women. Only one cause, only one solution. It's taught by "wounded healers." It's gender-polarizing-perpetrates the "battle of the sexes".

Related: Official Washington Policy: Blame the Victim. State regulations mandate sexism in perpetrator treatment programs. There is no excuse for his violence, even if he's been assaulted. If, however, she's the perpetrator, the program must give consideration to any prior assaults by him.

Related: Official Washington State Policy: The Gender Neutrality Joke Funding for a state-wide initiative to increase public awareness about battered men and to serve them would violate state law requiring gender-neutral programs. Is the state's domestic violence response system and battered women's shelter system gender neutral? This article based in part on Shelters must detail help for men By Gary Heinlein and Becky Beaupre / The Detroit News.

Click here for books on battered men.

Click here for books

Click here to return to MenWeb's Battered Men page

Click here for Battered Men

Click here to go to MenWeb's Dating Violence Men page

Click here for Dating Violence page
  

Domestic Violence in Washington: 25,473 Men a Year
According to a Nov. 1998 Department of Justice report on the National Violence Against Women Survey, 1,510,455 women and 834,732 men are victims of physical violence by an intimate. In Washington, that's 42,824 women and 25,473 men. That includes 2,754 on whom a knife was used, 5,508 threatened with a knife and 11,016 hit with an object. Here are the data.

Help for Battered Men Practical suggestions, Hotline numbers, on-line resources. Print it out and hand it to a man you think may be battered--your caring opens him up to talking about it.

Men's Stories Here are some personal stories by battered men, and links to sites with more of them. The more we talk about it, the more we tell our stories, the more we increase public awareness that men are battered and encourage battered men to get the help they need. Send us your story, so we can post it here (anonymously, of course, unless you tell us differently.)

What's Wrong with the Duluth Model? The "Duluth Model" is the approach most widely used for perpetrator treatment--but it gender polarizes the "people problem" of domestic violence.. What's wrong with the Duluth Model? It blames and shames men. It's based on ideology, not science. It ignores drinking, drugs and pathology. Only one cause, only one solution. There's no real evidence it works. It ignores domestic violence by women. Women who need help can't get it. It's taught by wounded healers.

Latest Research Findings National Violence Against Women survey shows 37.5% of victims each year are men. Men are at real risk of serious physical injury. Murray A. Straus looks at controversies in DV research. Martin Fiebert examines reasons women give for assaulting men. JAMA emergency room study shows equal number of men, woman victims.

 
     

Help us help men
$20  
Every $20 helps!

Articles | Men's Stories | Poetry | What's here? | What's New? | Home Page | Search MenWeb | E-mail MenWeb

Mt. Fury, by Ian HendersonIan Henderson's mountain art stimulates the eye-magination and his music calms the soul

Press the "Back" button on your browser to return