A Comparison of Clients in a Differentiated Batterer Intervention Treatment Program: The Importance of Treatment Level Matching by Referral Sources

• DOI: 10.1177/0306624X20981046
• Date: 01 December 2021
• Published date: 01 December 2021
• Subject Matter: Articles

https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X20981046

International Journal of

Offender Therapy and

Comparative Criminology

2021, Vol. 65(16) 1804 –1822

© The Author(s) 2020

Article reuse guidelines:

sagepub.com/journals-permissions

DOI: 10.1177/0306624X20981046

journals.sagepub.com/home/ijo

Article

A Comparison of Clients in

a Differentiated Batterer

Intervention Treatment

Program: The Importance

of Treatment Level Matching

by Referral Sources

Taylor L. Claxton1 and Tara N. Richards1

Abstract

Recent research has emphasized the applicability of the Principles of Effective Intervention

for batterer intervention treatment programs (BIPs), including using differentiated

treatment models for first-time offenders compared to repeat offenders. The current

study seeks to examine treatment matching across clients in two such differentiated BIPs

from a mid-Atlantic state—one short-term program aimed at first-time IPV offenders

(n = 121) and one program implementing BIP “as usual” (n = 125)—regarding client

characteristics and recidivism. Findings indicate that clients in the short-term program

were not significantly different than those referred to BIP “as usual” regarding common

risk factors such as substance use, education, or employment, and while clients in the

short-term program had fewer criminal history offenses, participants were rarely first-

time criminal offenders. Further analyses showed no impact of the short-term program

completion on client recidivism, while completion of BIP as usual was related to lower

rates of reoffending among the program’s clients. Findings suggest the importance of how

clients are matched to their level of treatment and more education and monitoring of

referral agencies regarding differentiated BIP models. Further research is needed to assess

whether short-term BIP programs are associated with recidivism reduction.

Keywords

batterer intervention treatment programs, differentiated treatment, principles of

effective intervention, program attrition

1University of Nebraska, Omaha, NE, USA

Corresponding Author:

Taylor L. Claxton, School of Criminology and Criminal Justice, University of Nebraska, Omaha, 6001

Dodge Street, 218 CPACS, Omaha, NE 68182-0149, USA.

Email: tclaxton@unomaha.edu

981046IJOXXX10.1177/0306624X20981046International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative CriminologyClaxton and Richards

research-article2020

Claxton and Richards 1805

Introduction

Treatment programs for intimate partner violence (IPV) offenders, often referred to

as batterer intervention treatment programs (BIPs), are one of the primary responses

to IPV in the United States (Canon et al., 2016). BIPs seek to reduce IPV recidivism

by holding offenders accountable while also ensuring that they take responsibility for

their actions and work to change attitudes and behaviors linked to violence perpetra-

tion (Ferraro, 2017). BIPs are diverse in their content, client characteristics, and pro-

gram duration. Program hallmarks often include the requirement that clients take

responsibility for the abuse, engage in group-based treatment sessions aimed at

developing skills to address problem behaviors, and pay program fees (Price &

Rosenbaum, 2009).

Recent research has called for the integration of the Principles of Effective

Intervention or PEIs into batterer treatment (e.g., Murphy & Richards, 2020; Radatz &

Wright, 2016; Stewart et al., 2013). Stemming from research on correctional program-

ming, the PEIs are propositions that describe how to classify offenders based on crimi-

nogenic risks and needs and reduce recidivism through intervention programming that

directly targets these risks/needs (Andrews et al., 1990). Consistent with the PEIs,

some BIPs are attempting to assign clients to treatment based on their level of service

needs (i.e., treatment matching). While treatment matching in other correctional pro-

gramming is often based on the use of a validated risk assessment, like the Level of

Service Inventory (LSI; Andrews, 1982; Andrews & Bonta, 1995), risk assessments

for treatment matching in BIP settings are not yet widely used.

One alternative mechanism for BIP treatment matching is to use a client’s status as

a “first-time IPV offender” to assign them to less intensive treatment than those with a

greater entrenchment in IPV offending. However, there has been little research on

whether this status is sufficient to differentiate clients based on level of criminogenic

risks and needs. In other words, few studies have focused on the characteristics of

first-time IPV offenders and whether they have fewer risks and needs, and thus war-

rant less intensive treatment, than clients with longer histories of IPV offending.

Understanding whether these first-time IPV offenders are in fact “different” is critical

to advancing the use of the PEIs in interventions for IPV offenders. The current explor-

atory study examines the use of treatment matching, client characteristics, and treat-

ment impact through the examination of a BIP program with differentiated treatment

levels (low intensity vs. high intensity) that matches clients based upon a first-time

IPV offender (FTIPVO) status.

Batterer Intervention Treatment Program Models and Characteristics

Batterer intervention treatment programs adhere to different models which vary in

terms of content and focal points for clients. There are three common models of BIPs;

however, programs often adopt elements from multiple models in their interventions

(Barner & Carney, 2011; Ferraro, 2017). The Duluth model is the most common BIP

model. Using a psychoeducational approach, this model seeks to challenge thoughts