Skip to main content

Desistance from Intimate Partner Violence and the Role of Victims-Survivors

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Reimagining Desistance from Male-Perpetrated Intimate Partner Violence

Abstract

This chapter provides an overview of the limited existing research that has examined intimate partner violence (IPV) desistance processes and describes the mechanisms or theory of change underpinning the cessation or reduction of violent and abusive behaviours. The role of victims-survivors in IPV desistance pathways is also explored, finding that victims-survivors as potential agents of change are largely absent. However, consistent with dyadic models of IPV, a number of studies demonstrate that victims-survivors are engaging in a range of strategies to keep themselves safe, and these strategies have both positive and negative impacts on the abuser’s behaviour. This strongly suggests a need to explore the role of victims-survivors in desistance processes and to move beyond focusing solely on abuser-centric processes and attributions for behavioural change.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Hardcover Book
USD 139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    That abuser readiness to change and their perceived ability to implement the strategies to make the desired change are positively associated with desistance is important considering they are dynamic rather than static (i.e. unchangeable) factors. Certainly, intervention programs attempting to initiate and support IPV desistance processes are unable to influence the gender and age of individuals, but they may be able to impact any abuser’s cognitive state. This highlights the importance of identifying dynamic factors that are associated with desistance, rather than simply focusing on those that are immovable.

  2. 2.

    In the early 1990s, Holtzworth-Munroe and Stuart conducted a review of extant IPV typologies to identify consistencies between them. Three major dimensions were used to distinguish between groups of abusers: severity of marital physical violence and related abuse (e.g. frequency and type), generality of the violence (e.g. family-only) and related variables such as criminal behaviour and legal involvement and the presence of a psychopathology or personality disorder. The authors’ typology describes three abuser sub-types:

    • Family-only

    • Dysphoric/borderline

    • Generally violent/antisocial

    Family-only abusers were described as being involved in the least severe forms of marital violence. Their abusive behaviours were restricted to family members, and they were the least likely to engage in violence outside of the home. As such, they had fewer related legal problems and also had lower rates of mental illness. The authors suggested that this group of abusers would comprise 50% of abuser populations if researchers recruited from the community. Dysphoric/borderline abusers engaged in moderate to severe abuse, including psychological and sexual abuse. Although abuse was primarily targeted at family members, low levels of extra-familial violence and other criminal behaviour were occasionally evident as well (e.g. drug use), as were higher rates of dysphoric, psychological distress and emotional volatility, as well as problems with alcohol and drugs. It was estimated that this group comprised approximately 25% of IPV abuser samples. Finally, generally violent/antisocial abusers were engaged in moderate to severe abusive behaviours, including psychological and sexual violence. They were engaged in frequent extra-familial violence and had the highest rates of criminal behaviour and legal involvement and drug and alcohol abuse. This group also had the highest rates of antisocial personality disorder or psychopathy. It was estimated that this group comprised approximately 25% of IPV abuser samples (Holtzworth-Munroe & Stuart, 1994).

  3. 3.

    Certainly, several authors have argued that bringing about desistance by changing abusers’ attitudes towards their behaviour is likely to have a limited impact, primarily because the majority of abusers do not view their behaviour as positive to begin with (Giordano et al., 2015; Gondolf & Hanneken, 1987; Tolman et al., 1996). As such, the possible margin of change for abusers’ attitudes will be minimal, and in turn behavioural change will be unlikely to occur (Gondolf & Hanneken, 1987).

  4. 4.

    More sophisticated recidivism studies have moved away from static definitions of single event failures to estimations of hazard ratios (propensity for offending) during different time periods. See, for example, Boxall and Morgan (2020), Morgan et al. (2018), Richards et al. (2014) and Yoshihama and Gillespie (2002).

References

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Boxall, H. (2023). Desistance from Intimate Partner Violence and the Role of Victims-Survivors. In: Reimagining Desistance from Male-Perpetrated Intimate Partner Violence. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32951-7_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-32951-7_3

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-32950-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-32951-7

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics